MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109552895 · doi:10.2174/15733998113099990076

A Review on Natural Products for Controlling Type 2 Diabetes with an Emphasis on their Mechanisms of Actions

2013· review· en· W2109552895 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Diabetes Reviews · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNatural (archaeology)Action (physics)Traditional medicineDiabetes mellitusRisk analysis (engineering)Intensive care medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of natural products is very common among non-industrialized societies because these remedies are more accessible and affordable than modern pharmaceuticals. In developed countries, use of herbal products has recently increased as scientific evidence about their effectiveness has become broadly available. For the past two decades many research articles in the field of ethno-pharmacology have focused on the anti-diabetic effects of some natural products. This dramatic increase of interest was partly due to the fact that type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) was considered as becoming a global epidemic health problem which imposed high cost to national health services around the world. We have no intention to advocate for replacing conventional pharmacotherapy with natural products to prevent and control T2DM. However, the fact that a lack of highly effective drug-therapy with existing synthetic agents and their resulting adverse effects motivated further search into traditional medicine in order to re-evaluate old remedies as well as screening to find new natural entities to be used as anti-diabetic products cannot be ignored. Some recent reports on the natural products with anti-diabetic effects have provided evidence for possible mechanisms of action. Nonetheless, the majority of investigators only speculated on a wide range of possible mechanisms or simply demonstrated an anti-hyperglycemic effect for the crude plant extracts or the isolated compounds of interest. A few reviews with less attention paid to mechanisms of action have been published on medicinal plants and diabetes. This article reviews publications on anti-diabetic natural products that have appeared in PUBMED or other research-related literature found on the Internet (from 1990 to present) to categorize them based on their mechanisms of action. We hope that this communication will be beneficial as a starting point to consider the discussed products for further investigations to identify and develop new remedies with potential alternative or complementary use in controlling T2DM.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it