Rheum rhaponticum Extract (ERr 731): Postmarketing Data on Safety Surveillance and Consumer Complaints.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CONTEXT: Postmarketing surveillance data for a commercially available extract of Rheum rhaponticum (ERr 731) have not been published since the beginning of the reporting in 1993 in Germany about adverse events (AEs) that were believed to be associated with it. The extract is derived from the plant's roots and is indicated for menopausal relief. In Germany, the extract has been marketed as Phytoestrol N and other related products-Phyto-Strol, Phyto-Strol Loges, and Phyto-Strol compact and as femi-loges. In the United States and Canada and in South Africa, the product had been marketed as Estrovera. OBJECTIVE: The study's objective was to summarize the AE reports from Germany from 1993 to June 2014 and also to assess consumers' complaints in North America and South Africa from the date of the extract's launch to June 2014. DESIGN: AE reports recorded by 2 German holders of marketing authorizations, Chemisch-Pharmazeutische Fabrik Göppingen, for Phytoestrol N, and Dr. Loges + Co. GmbH, for femi-loges, were collected and analyzed. Consumers' complaints in North America and South Africa that had been captured by the US distributor of Estrovera were also collected and analyzed. RESULTS: From 1993 to June 2014, approximately 140 million daily doses of the extract were placed on the German market, and 124 AE reports were recorded. The most common of those AEs were hypersensitivity, with 74 reactions, and gastrointestinal symptoms, with 47 reactions. From January 2009 to June 2014, approximately 13 million tablets of the supplement were sold in North America, and 79 complaints from consumers associated with a physical response to it had been recorded. The main complaints were gastrointestinal symptoms, with 23 cases, and failure to work as suggested, with 22 cases. From the date of the product's launch in South Africa in February 2011 to June 2014, no consumer complaints have been reported. CONCLUSIONS: The records related to postmarketing surveillance and consumers' complaints suggest that the extract of R rhaponticum is generally safe for consumption.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».