Trial reportFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Trial report 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Age-related memory decline has emerged as a critical global public health challenge, yet few ethnopharmacological interventions have demonstrated robust clinical efficacy in improving memory and cognitive function. Objectives: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial aimed to elucidate the neurocognitive-enhancing mechanisms of a botanical product containing Methods: 117 healthy participants (aged 30-65 years) were randomized to receive either CG tablets or placebo for 30 days. Clinical memory assessments and MRI scans were conducted at baseline and post-intervention. Gray matter volume (GMV), functional MRI (fMRI), and functional connectivity (FC) were analyzed using SPM12. Results: CG tablets significantly improved scores in across multiple dimensions, including directional memory, associative learning, graphic free recall, portrait memory, total memory, and Memory Quotient (all Conclusion: These findings indicated that CG supplementation enhances memory function in healthy adults. These cognitive gains are linked to specific structural and functional neural changes, particularly in motor-related areas and the cerebellum, reflecting improved neural processing. While these findings highlight CG's short-term benefits, further research is warranted to explore its long-term efficacy and broader clinical utility.This study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (https://www.chictr.org.cn/): ChiCTR2400084102. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/hvshowproject.html?id=251905&v=1.0, identifier ChiCTR2400084102.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.