MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109716616

Promising preventive and therapeutic effects of TaibUVID nutritional supplements for COVID-19 pandemic: towards better public prophylaxis and treatment (A retrospective study).

2020· article· en· W3109716616 on OpenAlexaff
Salah Mohamed El Sayed, Moutasem Salih Aboonq, Amr Gamal El Rashedy, Yasmeen Talal Aljehani, Rabab M Abou El-Magd, Ahmed M. Okashah, Mariam E El-Anzi, Mansour Barakah Alharbi, Rehab El-Tahlawi, Manal Mohamed Helmy Nabo, Reda S Yousef, Momen Elshazley, Mostafa Abu-Elnaga, Hany Salah Mahmoud, Hassan El-Alaf, Abdelrahman Ibrahim Abdelrahman, Abdelhady Ragab Abdel-Gawad, Tamer M. Soliman

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNigella sativa pharmacological applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMalaiseSore throatInternal medicinePneumoniaDysgeusiaTraditional medicineAdverse effectSurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adjuvant nutritional treatment is a commonly overlooked topic when treating lethal viral diseases as COVID-19 pandemic. We recently introduced TaibUVID nutritional supplements (nigella sativa, chamomile and natural honey) as adjuvants for COVID-19 contacts, patients and public prophylaxis. TaibUVID Forte adds costus, senna and fennel to TaibUVID. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews confirmed evidence-based therapeutic benefits of TaibUVID components in treating many human diseases e.g. diabetes mellitus and hypertension, common co-morbidities in COVID-19 patients. Double-blind clinical trials for treating COVID-19 patients with TaibUVID supplements were inapplicable. In this retrospective study in Egypt, COVID-19 patients and contacts knew TaibUVID via social media and voluntarily used them. 65% of COVID-19 patients (n = 13) received both pharmacological treatments and adjuvant TaibUVID nutritional supplements. 35% (n = 7) received TaibUVID only. Lymphopenia rapidly improved to lymphocytosis upon regular TaibUVID intake. TaibUVID nutritional supplements helped COVID-19 contacts' prophylaxis. 70% of COVID-19 contacts (n = 14) (on regular TaibUVID intake) did not get SARS-COV2 infection. 30% (n = 6) were not using TaibUVID regularly and got mild flu-like symptoms and upon using both TaibUVID and pharmacological treatments, all improved and got negative nasopharyngeal swabs PCR. COVID-19 contacts were mainly physicians (40%, n = 8) (dealing with COVID-19 patients daily) and members of physicians' families (45%). Main presentations reported by COVID-19 patients (n = 20) were cough (90%), fever (55%), anosmia (45%), taste loss (45%), sore throat (45%), respiratory difficulty (45%) and malaise (35%). TaibUVID inhalation therapy (nigella sativa/anthemis/costus solution nebulization) was used by 65% of COVID-19 patients (n = 13) and alleviated respiratory manifestations e.g. cough and respiratory difficulty and was life-saving in some cases. 70% of COVID-19 patients (n = 14) improved in 1-4 days, 25% (n = 5) improved in 5-10 days while 5% improved in more than 10 days. TaibUVID nutritional supplements were tolerable and significantly satisfactory (P<0.01). 81.25% of COVID-19 patients (n = 13) did not report side effects. 18.25% (n = 3) reported mild diarrhea, sweating and hyperglycemia (not confirmed to be due to TaibUVID supplements). 31.25% of patients (n = 5) were satisfied by 100% with TaibUVID nutritional supplements. 37.5% (n = 6) of patients were satisfied by 75%. In conclusion, TaibUVID nutritional supplements are recommended for public prophylaxis (to decrease emergence of new cases) and treatment in COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical trials and further investigations are recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicNigella sativa pharmacological applicationsFrench-language works237,207