SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Antimicrobial potential of selected medicinal plants against drug-resistant pathogens: a systematic review.
Synthesis 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a critical global health threat, necessitating the discovery of novel antimicrobial agents. Traditional medicinal plants have long been used for managing infectious diseases, yet scientific validation of their efficacy remains limited for many species. This systematic review synthesizes existing evidence on the antimicrobial activities of nine medicinal plants traditionally used: Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in Google Scholar for studies published between 1 January 2000-1 August 2025. Search terms combined each plant's scientific name with antimicrobial-related keywords ("antimicrobial," "antibacterial," "antifungal") and study type filters (" Results: A total of fifty-six eligible studies were included in the review. The evidence indicated that antibacterial and antifungal activities varied among the studied species. Conclusion: This review highlights the antimicrobial potential of the selected medicinal plants and supports their traditional use in managing infectious diseases. Standardized methodologies and bioactive compound isolation are recommended to facilitate their future development as candidates for combating AMR pathogens. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251047619.
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.