MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162086290 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2021.625386

Nigella Plants – Traditional Uses, Bioactive Phytoconstituents, Preclinical and Clinical Studies

2021· review· en· W3162086290 on OpenAlexaff
Bahare Salehi, Cristina Quispe, Muhammad Imran, Iahtisham Ul‐Haq, Jelena Živković, Ibrahim M. Abu‐Reidah, Surjit Sen, Yasaman Taheri, Krishnendu Acharya, Hamed Azadi, María del Mar Contreras, Antonio Segura‐Carretero, Dima Mnayer, Gautam Sethi, Miquel Martorell, Ahmad Faizal Abdull Razis, Sunusi Usman, Ramla Muhammad Kamal, Hafiz Ansar Rasul Suleria, Javad Sharifi‐Rad

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNigella sativa pharmacological applications
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaJunta de Andalucía
KeywordsNigella sativaPhytochemicalRanunculaceaeThymoquinoneTraditional medicineLinoleic acidBiologyMedicineBotanyFatty acidBiochemistryAntioxidant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nigella is a small genus of the family Ranunculaceae, which includes some popular species due to their culinary and medicinal properties, especially in Eastern Europe, Middle East, Western, and Central Asia. Therefore, this review covers the traditional uses and phytochemical composition of Nigella and, in particular, Nigella sativa. The pharmacological studies reported in vitro, in vivo, and in humans have also been reviewed. One of the main strength of the use of Nigella is that the seeds are rich in the omega-6 fatty acid linoleic acid and provide an extra-source of dietary phytochemicals, including the bioactive thymoquinone, and characteristics saponins, alkaloids, and flavonoids. Among Nigella species, N. sativa L. is the most studied plant from the genus. Due to the phytochemical composition and pharmacological properties, the seed and seed oil from this plant can be considered as good candidates to formulate functional ingredients on the basis of folklore and scientific knowledge. Nonetheless, the main limations are that more studies, especially, clinical trials are required to standardize the results, e.g. to establish active molecules, dosage, chemical profile, long-term effects and impact of cooking/incorporation into foods.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.335
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations95
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicNigella sativa pharmacological applicationsFrench-language works237,207