Review of <i>Sangre de Drago</i> ( <i>Croton lechleri</i> ) - A South American Tree Sap in the Treatment of Diarrhea, Inflammation, Insect Bites, Viral Infections, and Wounds: Traditional Uses to Clinical Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the pharmacologic evidence that may or may not support clinical and ethnomedical uses of the sap of sangre de drago (dragon's blood; Croton lechleri Müll. Arg.). Data sources used were BIOSIS, EMBASE, PubMed, TOXLIT, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, manual searches, papers on file from peer-reviewed journals, textbooks available at Armana Research, Inc., and researchers in the field of South American botanical medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The results of in vitro and in vivo studies largely support the majority of ethnomedical uses of sangre de drago including the treatment of diarrhea, wounds, tumors, stomach ulcers, herpes infection, the itching, pain and swelling of insect bites, and other conditions. Clinical studies of sangre de drago products have reported positive results in the treatment of traveler's and watery diarrhea and the symptoms of insect bites. Because the sap has shown low toxicity and preparations used in clinical studies were well tolerated, further clinical and pharmacologic studies are anticipated. Acknowledgment of the diversity in the chemical makeup of the sap from one geographic area to another and the recent characterization of alkaloid chemotypes of sangre de drago will require that materials developed for clinical use are standardized.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".