Evaluation of Antioxidant and Wound Healing Effects of Alcoholic and Aqueous Extract of <i>Ocimum sanctum Linn</i> in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, oxidative stress and free radicals have been implicated in impaired wound healing. Ocimum sanctum (O. sanctum), a plant widely used in Ayurveda, possesses anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. The present study was undertaken to assess the potential of alcoholic and aqueous extracts in wound healing in Wistar albino rats. The rats were divided into five groups of six animals each. Group 1 is normal wounded control and the other four groups were treated with two different doses each of alcoholic and aqueous extract of O. sanctum. The wound healing parameters were evaluated by using incision, excision and dead space wounds in extract-treated rats and controls. Both the doses of alcoholic and aqueous extract significantly increased wound breaking strength, hydroxyproline, hexuronic acid, hexosamines, superoxide dismutase, catalase, reduced glutathione and significantly decreased percentage of wound contraction and lipid peroxidation when compared with the control group. The results suggest that O. sanctum has antioxidant properties, which may be responsible and favorable for faster wound healing and this plant extract may be useful in the management of abnormal healing and hypertropic scars.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".