MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ethnomedicinal Uses of Fabaceae Species for Respiratory Infections and Related Symptoms in the Limpopo Province, South Africa

2018· article· en· W3208075094 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sebua Silas Semenya, Alfred Maroyi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Fort HareNational Research Foundation
KeywordsFabaceaeTraditional medicineHerbariumAcaciaEthnomedicineMedicinePneumoniaMedicinal plantsBiologyBotanyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The present study investigated utilisation of Fabaceae species as herbal medicines for respiratory infections and related symptoms in the Limpopo Province, South Africa.Methods: Information on Fabaceae species used as herbal medicines against respiratory infections was gathered using semi-structured questionnaires during face-to-face interviews with 240 Pedi speaking traditional healers (THs) from May to July 2017. Voucher specimens of utilized plant species were collected and their identities and scientific names authenticated by a plant taxonomist at the University of Limpopo’s Larry Leach Herbarium.Results: Twenty-five plant species belonging to 16 genera were used by THs in treating 13 respiratory infections. Majority of the species (64.0%, n=16) were multi-used while 36.0% (n=9) treated a single condition each. Plants which showed the highest fidelity level (FL) scores included Acacia senegal (chronic cough=FL; 32.8, chest pain=FL; 32.8, tuberculosis=FL; 32.8), Dichrostachys cinerea (tuberculosis= FL; 100) and Acacia erioloba (pneumonia=FL; 92.7). These species were also characterized by high use value (UV) indices of 2.5, 0.82 and 0.58, respectively.Conclusion: Some of the plants recorded in this study are reported in literature to have potent biological activities against diverse pathogens which cause respiratory infections and perceived symptoms.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition SciencesSame topicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesFrench-language works237,207