Cited by 78Ginkgo biloba and Cashew ApplicationsAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Ginkgo biloba in Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review

Janßen, Inger M., Sturtz, Sibylle, Skipka, Guido, Zentner, Annette, Garrido, Marcial V., Busse, Reinhard·2010·Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift

Abstract

This systematic review determines the benefit of treatment with Ginkgo biloba (Ginkgo) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) concerning patient-relevant outcomes. Bibliographic databases, clinical trial and study result registries were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with AD (follow-up ≥16 weeks) comparing Ginkgo to placebo or a different treatment option. Manufacturers were asked to provide unpublished data. If feasible, data were pooled by meta-analysis. Six studies were eligible; overall, high heterogeneity was shown for most outcomes, except safety aspects. Among studies administering high-dose Ginkgo (240 mg), all studies favour treatment though effects remain heterogeneous. In this subgroup, a benefit of Ginkgo exists for activities of daily living. Cognition and accompanying psychopathological symptoms show an indication of a benefit. A harm of Ginkgo is not evident. An estimation of the effect size was not possible for any outcome. Further evidence is needed which focuses especially on subgroups of AD patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10354-010-0844-8

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Modest cognitive function enhancement was noted in Alzheimer's disease subjects in numerous randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials.

    “Modest cognitive function enhancement was noted in AD subjects in numerous randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials [126,127].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Janßen, I. M., Sturtz, S., Skipka, G., Zentner, A., Garrido, M. V., & Busse, R.
Affiliations
  • Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (DE)
  • Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Janßen, Inger M.
Venue
Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift
Published
2010-12
Volume
160
Issue
21-22
Pages
539-546
ISSN
  • 0043-5341 (ISSN-L)
  • 1563-258X
OpenAlex
W1533053737
Cited by
78
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Ginkgo biloba and Cashew Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
Ginkgo biloba, Alzheimer's disease, herbal medicine, cognitive function, activities of daily living, psychiatric symptoms, treatment safety, dose comparison, placebo comparison
MeSH terms
Ginkgo Extract, Alzheimer Disease, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Phytotherapy, Plant Extracts, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Nootropic Agents, Ginkgo biloba

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review