The Histological Effect of Aqueous Ginger Extract on Kidneys and Lungs of Diabetic Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes is a disorder affecting various-aged humans and which can with time cause serious problems for the patient. Medicinal plants are known for their hypoglycemic effects; and among which is ginger (Zingiber officinale) known also for its culinary uses. This study, therefore, was undertaken to evaluate the histological effect of 21-day treatment of aqueous ginger extract used at 500 mg / kg BW on female diabetic rats. Fifteen female albino rats were divided into three groups; Group I: control, Group II: non-treated diabetic, and Group III: ginger extract-treated diabetic rats. The ginger extract-treated diabetic group received the daily dose orally for three weeks. Results show that organ weight was not significantly changed. Light microscopic examination of 5µm sections of extract-treated Kidney and Lung of the diabetic rats revealed approximately normal histological structure compared with the untreated ones. The normal appearance of glomeruli and alveoli as well as the normal alveolar wall assumed the ameliorative effect ginger aqueous extract could have on kidney and lung of diabetic rats. These results indicated that this dose of ginger extract may be effective in the treatment of diabetic rats.
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) | 0.000 | 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".