ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Article 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Honey-based biomaterials have gained increasing interest as topical strategies for wound-related applications because of their antimicrobial, antioxidant, and tissue-supportive properties. However, the direct use of raw honey is limited by its viscosity, variability, and lack of standardized delivery systems. This study aimed to perform a preliminary Methods: Eight Chilean honey samples with varying contributions of Quillay ( Results: All honey samples met basic physicochemical quality criteria. CHH formulations did not reduce fibroblast metabolic activity, whereas CHH-50% and CHH-100% significantly increased resazurin reduction compared with untreated control cells. Raw honey significantly increased nitrite accumulation, whereas CHH formulations did not increase nitrite levels under the experimental conditions tested. In agar diffusion assays, CHH produced larger and more homogeneous inhibition zones than raw honey against Discussion: These findings support CHH as a biocompatible honey-derived formulation with improved antibacterial performance compared with raw honey under
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.