Evidence mapPaperPMID 41716686Full record

ArticleSouth African journal of botany : official journal of the South African Association of Botanists = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir plantkunde : amptelike tydskrif van die Suid-Afrikaanse Genootskap van Plantkundiges2026

A deep dive into herbal extraction: Techniques, trends, and technological advancements.

Salman Ahmed, Khalaf F Alsharif, Michael Aschner, Khalid J Alzahrani, Esra Küpeli Akkol, Esra Gizem Türkcanoğlu, Haroon Khan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in South African journal of botany : official journal of the South African Association of Botanists = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir plantkunde : amptelike tydskrif van die Suid-Afrikaanse Genootskap van Plantkundiges, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Salman AhmedDepartment of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Karachi, Karachi 75270, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0003-2033-0181
Khalaf F AlsharifDepartment of Clinical Laboratories Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia.
Michael AschnerDepartment of Molecular Pharmacology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10461, USA.
Khalid J AlzahraniDepartment of Clinical Laboratories Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-6688-0106
Esra Küpeli AkkolDepartment of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Gazi University, Ankara 06330, Türkiye.
Esra Gizem TürkcanoğluDepartment of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Gazi University, Ankara 06330, Türkiye.
Haroon KhanDepartment of Pharmacy, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Mardan 23200, Pakistan.

Funding

MECHANISMS OF METHYLMERCURY INDUCED NEURONAL TOXICITYR01ES007331 · NIEHS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · 1996 to 2025
$3.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES007331
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extraction, a vital process in herbal medicine, is crucial for isolating beneficial components from plant materials while eliminating unwanted elements. The modern pharmaceutical and nutraceutical industries are increasingly integrating traditional practices with advanced technologies to enhance efficacy and safety. This review aims to provide a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of herbal extraction, from initial steps like drying and size reduction to solvent selection, including water, methanol, and natural deep eutectic solvents (NADES). It examines the properties and suitability of these solvents for diverse plant extractions. The discourse extends to different extraction methods, encompassing liquid-liquid, solid phase, and solid-liquid techniques, detailing each method. From traditional methods like infusion and decoction to modern approaches such as pressurized liquid extraction (PLE) and microwave-assisted extraction (MAE), the review explores a range of extraction techniques. It also discusses the potential synergistic effects of combining extracts from different plants or employing multiple extraction methods to enhance therapeutic efficacy. Strategic selection of extraction methods is emphasized, balancing biological activity with practical considerations. Patent trends in herbal extraction methods provide insights into emerging innovations. By elucidating traditional and modern techniques, this discussion aims to assist practitioners with practical knowledge to optimize herbal extraction, ensuring premium-quality extracts tailored for medicinal and nutraceutical applications. Ultimately, this review aims to guide researchers and practitioners in navigating the complex herbal extraction landscape, driving advancements in pharmaceutical medicine.

Indexed as

Bioactive compoundsHerbal extractionModern techniquesTechnologyTraditional methods

Identifiers

PMID41716686
PMCPMC12916026

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.