Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42599865›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Preclinical evaluation of Ayurveda and Siddha Herbo-mineral formulations in cancer: A scoping review protocol.

Anjali Saini, Shalini Rai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Anjali SainiAll India Institute of Ayurveda, New Delhi, India.
Shalini RaiAll India Institute of Ayurveda, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7851-7208

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer poses a major global health challenge, with rising incidence and mortality rates straining healthcare systems worldwide. Despite remarkable advances in cancer management modalities, the current approaches still fall short in overcoming drug resistance, tumour heterogeneity, toxicity and side effects. Traditional systems such as Ayurveda and Siddha may help overcome these limitations of conventional medicine; however, robust evidence supporting the anticancer efficacy of Herbo mineral formulations (HMFs) remains limited and fragmented.

objectiveThis scoping review is planned to map the existing pre-clinical evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies for the anticancer activities of Ayurveda and Siddha HMFs.

methodsThe scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute for conducting scoping reviews. A systematic search will be conducted by two independent reviewers across selected databases for relevant literature, and studies will be selected on the basis of predefined eligibility criteria. Data from the included studies will be presented in tabular and narrative formats to align with the review objectives. The review will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. DISCUSSION: This review will contribute to integrating traditional medicine with modern oncology, guiding researchers and clinicians in prioritizing promising anticancer drugs for further investigation and potential therapeutic use. The review protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF) and is available at: osf.io/rdhpv/.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsMedicine, AyurvedicMineralsNeoplasmsAnimalsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumansScoping Reviews as TopicAntineoplastic AgentsMinerals

Identifiers

PMID42599865
PMCPMC13475941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.