MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415032888 · doi:10.3390/foods14203465

A Systematic Review of Evidence-Based Health Benefits of Oroxylum indicum and Its Functional Food Potential

2025· review· en· W4415032888 on OpenAlexaff
Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh, Amporn Sae‐Eaw, Witoon Prinyawiwatkul, Yaowared Chulikhit

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFlavonoids in Medical Research
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersKhon Kaen University
KeywordsFunctional foodHealth benefitsPhytochemicalHuman healthIngredientSystematic review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oroxylum indicum is a traditional food in Asia rich in flavonoids and health-related effects. However, research into the use of O. indicum as a functional food ingredient is overlooked. This review synthesized literature from 2010 to 2025 using the PRISMA framework, bibliometric mapping, and the Antecedents–Decisions–Outcomes (ADO) model. In total, 185 articles were included, covering in vitro, in vivo, in silico, and limited human investigations. Bibliometric analysis shows a growing global interest, with recent focuses on molecular docking, cancer, and conservation. Phytochemical investigations consistently report key flavonoids, including baicalein, baicalin, oroxylin A, chrysin, oroxin A, and oroxin B. Studies have linked these compounds to different health benefits, including antioxidants, cardiovascular, and neurological protection. Application of the ADO framework organized research into motives, methods, and outcomes, and highlighted scientifically validated ethnomedicinal uses, such as diabetes and liver protection. Meanwhile, gaps, including obesity-related studies, long-term safety, and clinical trials, remain. More importantly, although young fruits are locally consumed as vegetables or beverages, translation into functional foods is limited by bitterness, lack of standardized preparations, and insufficient dose–response data at dietary intakes. This review discusses the bioactive potential of O. indicum and outlines research priorities for its development in functional food.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0120.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoodsSame topicFlavonoids in Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207