Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38250440›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2023

Deep learning for medicinal plant species classification and recognition: a systematic review.

Adibaru Kiflie Mulugeta, Durga Prasad Sharma, Abebe Haile Mesfin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Deep fused explainable neural architecture for the automatic recognition of therapeutic medicinal plants.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. CNN-Based Classification ofBiosensors · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Assessing the climate change impact onFrontiers in plant science · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

3 authors.

Adibaru Kiflie MulugetaDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, School of Electrical Engineering and Computing, Adama Science and Technology University, Adama, Ethiopia.
Durga Prasad SharmaAMUIT, MOEFDRE under UNDP, MAISM- RTU, Kota, India.
Abebe Haile MesfinDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, School of Electrical Engineering and Computing, Adama Science and Technology University, Adama, Ethiopia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowledge of medicinal plant species is necessary to preserve medicinal plants and safeguard biodiversity. The classification and identification of these plants by botanist experts are complex and time-consuming activities. This systematic review's main objective is to systematically assess the prior research efforts on the applications and usage of deep learning approaches in classifying and recognizing medicinal plant species. Our objective was to pinpoint systematic reviews following the PRISMA guidelines related to the classification and recognition of medicinal plant species through the utilization of deep learning techniques. This review encompassed studies published between January 2018 and December 2022. Initially, we identified 1644 studies through title, keyword, and abstract screening. After applying our eligibility criteria, we selected 31 studies for a thorough and critical review. The main findings of this reviews are (1) the selected studies were carried out in 16 different countries, and India leads in paper contributions with 29%, followed by Indonesia and Sri Lanka. (2) A private dataset has been used in 67.7% of the studies subjected to image augmentation and preprocessing techniques. (3) In 96.7% of the studies, researchers have employed plant leaf organs, with 74% of them utilizing leaf shapes for the classification and recognition of medicinal plant species. (4) Transfer learning with the pre-trained model was used in 83.8% of the studies as a future extraction technique. (5) Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) is used by 64.5% of the paper as a deep learning classifier. (6) The lack of a globally available and public dataset need for medicinal plants indigenous to a specific country and the trustworthiness of the deep learning approach for the classification and recognition of medicinal plants is an observable research gap in this literature review. Therefore, further investigations and collaboration between different stakeholders are required to fulfilling the aforementioned research gaps.

Indexed as

classificationdeep learningmedicinal plant datasetmedicinal plant speciesrecognition

Identifiers

PMID38250440
PMCPMC10796487

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.