Evidence mapPaperPMID 27367973Full record

ReviewNatural product reports2016

Comparison of analytical techniques for the identification of bioactive compounds from natural products.

Łukasz Cieśla, Ruin Moaddel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Natural product reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Unlocking theMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Exploration of Antimicrobial Ingredients inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. The Fluorescence Detection of Phenolic Compounds inPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Łukasz CieślaLaboratory of Clinical Investigation, Biomedical Research Center, 8C232, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, 251 Bayview Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21224, USA. moaddelru@mail.nih.gov.
Ruin Moaddel

Funding

Bioanalysis, Drug Metabolism and New Drug DiscoveryZIAAG000297 · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · 2025 to 2025
$3.8M
Immobilized Proteins In Drug DiscoveryZIAAG000295 · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · 2025 to 2025
$384k
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 AG999999Intramural NIH HHS ZIA AG000295
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Covering: 2000 to 2016Natural product extracts are a rich source of bioactive compounds. As a result, the screening of natural products for the identification of novel biologically active metabolites has been an essential part of several drug discovery programs. It is estimated that more than 70% of all drugs approved from 1981 and 2006, were either derived from or structurally similar to nature based compounds indicating the necessity for the development of a rapid method for the identification of novel compounds from plant extracts. The screening of biological matrices for the identification of novel modulators is nevertheless still challenging. In this review we discuss current techniques in phytochemical analysis and the identification of biologically active components.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryBiological ProductsMolecular StructurePlant ExtractsBiological ProductsPlant Extracts

Identifiers

PMID27367973
PMCPMC5042860

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 Socratic graph.