MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405005301 · doi:10.52711/0974-360x.2024.00710

Assessment of Moringa oleifera’s Efficacy in Promoting Burn Wound Healing in Wistar Rats: A Preclinical Evaluation

2024· article· en· W4405005301 on OpenAlexaff
Pushpa Prasad Gupta, Shashikant Chandrakar, Rahul Deo Yadav, Amit Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Journal of Pharmacy and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMoringa oleifera research and applications
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoringaBurn woundMedicineTraditional medicineWound healingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moringa oleifera [M. olifera] is an indigenous plant of India. It is used in various diseases in different forms. In current study ethanolic extract of bark of M. olifera was used to formulate an ointment with white soft paraffin. Burn wound model was used to evaluate wound healing potential of M. olifera. Second-degree burns were created using a spatula [1 cm diameter] in wistar albino rat. 5 group’s were made, randomly, of wistar rats, i.e. positive control [treated with ointment base], negative control [with no treatment], Test I and II [Ointment at 5% and 10% ethanolic extract of M. olifera bark], Standard drug treated group. Parameters that were used for evaluating the activity were the percentage of wound contraction and histopathology of skin. The result showed dose dependent activity on contraction of wound. In study of histopathology it was observed that period of epithelialization got shortened and significant increase in periods of granulation tissue formation M. oleifera treated groups when compared to untreated control groups. These results represent that the M. olifera can be useful as a excellent therapeutic instrument in the management of burn wounds. Additional characterization is required for identifying the chemical constituents responsible for wound healing.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Journal of Pharmacy and TechnologySame topicMoringa oleifera research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207