19 research outputs found
HERBAL RECIPES USED FOR THE TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT OF INFANTILE DERMATITIS IN ODEDA, SOUTHWESTERN NIGERIA
Background: The period of infancy, spanning through the neonatal stage to two years, is characterized by a series of health
challenges for the affected child and concerned parents. This study conducted in Odeda Local Government Area of Ogun State,
Nigeria was aimed at investigating the plants used in the traditional management of infantile dermatitis and other neonatal skin
infections with emphasis on the role of SPICES.
Methods: Structured questionnaires (and personal interview) were administered to 36 nursing mothers (age range, 15 – 50) and 30
herbsellers (age range, 21 – 60) in the LGA. The herbsellers prescribed recipes used in the management of general skin diseases
including abscess, chicken pox, eczema, flaky skin spots, measles, rashes, ringworm, and small pox.
Results: The survey yielded 69 plants belonging to 38 families and forming 25 polyherbal and mono-recipes. Fabaceae, Rutaceae,
Euphorbiaceae, Annonaceae, Poaceae, Meliaceae, and Amaryllidaceae had high species representation. Trees (40.58%) were the
most frequently used plant habit while leaves (40.58%) formed the most frequently used plant part. Decoction and infusion using
pure water were the methods of preparation suggested. Administration ranged from drinking extracts (2-3 teaspoonfuls) three times
daily, to bathing with warm extracts of the plants and the use of coconut oil as cream. Traditional black soap and Shea butter also
featured in the herbal remedy for bath and as cream respectively. Local sponge was preferred for bathing.
Conclusion: This study has documented the alternative medical approach in the management of infantile skin diseases. The cultural
relevance of plants calls for sustainable use of plant resources. This research finds application in primary health care, microbiology,
and in cosmetic industries for the development of new or improved baby skin care products. Further research should be conducted to
confirm the claimed ethnomedicinal values as well as evaluate possible harm of crude plant extracts to skin structures of infants
Sickness absenteeism and associated factors among horticulture employees in lume district, southeast Ethiopia
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Funder: laura and john arnold foundationBACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). METHODS: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. RESULTS: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care
Effects of antioxidants on glutathione levels and clinical recovery from the malnutrition syndrome kwashiorkor – a pilot study
Effects of Guided Discovery and Think-Pair-Share Strategies on Secondary School Students’ Achievement in Chemistry
Mortality Risk among Children Admitted in a Large-Scale Nutritional Program in Niger, 2006
Network analysis, sequence and structure dynamics of key proteins of coronavirus and human host, and molecular docking of selected phytochemicals of nine medicinal plants
Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used against human ailments in Gubalafto District, Northern Ethiopia
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care