Exploring and Comparing Existing Natural Product Databases Towards Whole Person Health Research.

Xiaoyi Chen, Meijia Song, Yu Hou, Rubina F Rizvi, Jeffrey R Bishop, Piper A Ranallo, Thomas R Hoye, Rui Zhang

Abstract readComparative Study

In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Xiaoyi ChenDivision of Computational Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Meijia SongSchool of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis MN, United States.

Yu HouDivision of Computational Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Rubina F RizviDivision of Computational Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Jeffrey R BishopDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Piper A RanalloDivision of Computational Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Thomas R HoyeDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Rui ZhangDivision of Computational Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural products are essential in drug discovery, chemical biology, and medicinal chemistry. Despite their widespread use, NP data remains fragmented across various databases, limiting their utility for whole person health research, which requires comprehensive, interoperable resources. This study explores and compares three major NP databases: COCONUT, NP-MRD, and GSRS, assessing their scope, structural representation, metadata completeness, and accessibility. COCONUT provides extensive chemical diversity, NP-MRD emphasizes spectral and physical property data, and GSRS focuses on regulatory classification. Despite their strengths, overlap between databases is moderate to small, and significant gaps remain in integrating medical and pharmaceutical information. Improved interoperability and harmonization are needed to support advanced computational models for whole person health. Our findings highlight critical gaps and opportunities to enhance NP database integration, laying the groundwork for developing comprehensive resources that better support data-driven investigations of natural products.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsBiomedical ResearchDatabases, FactualHumansBiological Products

Identifiers

PMID41726513

PMCPMC12919503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.