Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42718813›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2026

Natural products for the management of diarrhea: a systematic review of clinical efficacy, safety, and certainty of evidence.

Camila Bach, Carolina Silva Schiebel, Lara Luisa Valerio de Mello Braga, Ana Carolina Vieira Ulysséa Fernandes, Mariana Avancini, Gabriel Ferreira Fernandes, Jonatan Zaleski, Jessica Boschini D'Agostin, Daniele Maria-Ferreira

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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

9 authors.

Camila BachFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Carolina Silva SchiebelFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Lara Luisa Valerio de Mello BragaFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Ana Carolina Vieira Ulysséa FernandesFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Mariana AvanciniFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Gabriel Ferreira FernandesFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Jonatan ZaleskiFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Jessica Boschini D'AgostinFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
Daniele Maria-FerreiraFaculdades Pequeno Príncipe, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Diarrhea is a common gastrointestinal disorder caused by infections, inflammatory diseases, or treatment-related toxicity, particularly from chemotherapy and radiotherapy, often compromising treatment adherence and quality of life. Natural products have been increasingly investigated as complementary therapeutic strategies; however, their clinical efficacy, safety, and certainty of evidence remain unclear. Methods: This systematic review evaluated clinical efficacy, safety, and certainty of evidence of natural products for the management of diarrhea in oncological and non-oncological settings. The review followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42025572477). PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify human clinical trials evaluating natural products for diarrhea. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results and Discussion: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and evaluated interventions including Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f [Asphodelaceae; Aloe barbadensis], partially hydrolyzed guar gum, Berberis aristata DC [Berberidaceae], and multibotanical herbal formulations such as Entoban and Amoebex. Most studies reported significant improvements in diarrhea-related outcomes, including reduced stool frequency and severity, improved stool consistency, and relief of associated gastrointestinal symptoms. An exploratory narrative synthesis suggested context-specific mechanisms of action, with microbiota modulation and anti-inflammatory effects more frequently associated with treatment-related diarrhea, whereas antimicrobial activity and intestinal barrier support appeared more relevant in nononcological conditions. However, the certainty of evidence was predominantly low to very low because of methodological limitations, including small sample sizes, inadequate blinding, heterogeneous outcome measures, and reliance on single-study evidence. Safety reporting was generally insufficient, although most interventions were associated with few reported adverse events. Complementary pharmacological evidence was used to contextualize potential herb-drug interactions, highlighting important safety considerations, particularly for patients receiving anticancer therapies with narrow therapeutic indices. Overall, natural products show promise as supportive interventions for diarrhea management; however, the current evidence is insufficient to support definitive clinical recommendations. High-quality randomized controlled trials with standardized outcome measures and comprehensive safety assessments are needed to establish their therapeutic value. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025572477.

Indexed as

diarrheadiarrhea managementevidence certaintyherb-drug interactionsoncology supportive care

Identifiers

PMID42718813
PMCPMC13553970

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.