ReviewNutrients2026
Plant-Derived Bioactives in Tendon and Enthesis Biology: An Evidence-Tiered Narrative Review.
Review in Nutrients, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tendon injury, tendon-bone interface disruption, and rotator cuff pathology involve inflammatory signaling, oxidative stress, extracellular matrix turnover, cellular senescence, and impaired differentiation. Plant-derived bioactive compounds, including curcumin, quercetin, and other flavonoids and botanical formulations, have been investigated across these pathways in preclinical tendon and enthesis models, but interpretation is complicated by heterogeneous models, formulations, delivery platforms, and endpoints. This review distinguishes preclinical and formulation-specific tissue-response signals from evidence sufficient to support patient-facing clinical or nutraceutical claims. It synthesizes 31 articles using an evidence-tiering framework separating preclinical plausibility (Tier 3), limited human-facing translational evidence (Tier 2), and robust clinical efficacy (Tier 1). The corpus was predominantly Tier 3, with two Tier 2 articles providing human tissue or clinically oriented evidence and no Tier 1 evidence identified. An evidence-calibrated translational proximity map and an overclaim prevention checklist are provided to guide interpretation. The proposed proximity map reflects relative translational position within a focused narrative corpus and was not based on systematic review methods, formal risk-of-bias assessment, or clinical intervention evidence. The limited human-facing evidence does not represent patient-intervention evidence and does not support clinical, supplementation, or treatment recommendations. These compounds remain candidates for staged translational investigation rather than established interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.