Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 337

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 115 of the 115 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Medicinal Plants of the Russian Pharmacopoeia; their history and applications

Open access
Shikov, Alexander N., Pozharitskaya, Olga N., Makarov, Valery G., Wagner, Hildebert, Verpoorte, Rob, Heinrich, Michael·2014·Journal of Ethnopharmacology

Abstract

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Due to the location of Russia between West and East, Russian phytotherapy has accumulated and adopted approaches that originated in European and Asian traditional medicine. Phytotherapy is an official and separate branch of medicine in Russia; thus, herbal medicinal preparations are considered official medicaments. The aim of the present review is to summarize and critically appraise data concerning plants used in Russian medicine. This review describes the history of herbal medicine in Russia, the current situation and the pharmacological effects of specific plants in the Russian Pharmacopoeia that are not included in the European Pharmacopoeia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the State Pharmacopoeia of the USSR (11(th) edition), we selected plant species that have not yet been adopted in Western and Central Europe (e.g., selected for inclusion in the European Pharmacopoeia) and systematically searched the scientific literature for data using library catalogs, the online service E-library.ru, and databases such as Medline/Pubmed, Scopus, and the Web of Science regarding species, effectiveness, pharmacological effects, and safety. RESULTS: The Russian Federation follows the State Pharmacopoeia of the USSR (11(th) edition), which contains 83 individual plant monographs. Fifty-one of these plants are also found in the European Pharmacopoeia and have been well studied, but 32 plants are found only in the Pharmacopoeia of the USSR. Many articles about these medicinal plants were never translated in English, and much of the information collected by Russian scientists has never been made available to the international community. Such knowledge can be applied in future studies aimed at a safe, evidence-based use of traditional Russian medicinal plants in European and global phytopharmacotherapy as well as for the discovery of novel leads for drug development. CONCLUSION: The review highlights the therapeutic potential of these Russian phytopharmaceuticals but also highlights cases where concern has been raised about product safety and tolerability, which would aid in supporting their safe use.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jep.2014.04.007

Cites

115 of 115 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 115 references

Cited by

See all 337

Metadata

Authors
Shikov, A. N., Pozharitskaya, O. N., Makarov, V. G., Wagner, H., Verpoorte, R., & Heinrich, M.
Venue
Journal of Ethnopharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-07
Volume
154
Issue
3
Pages
481-536
ISSN
0378-8741 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2043881716
Cited by
337
References
115
FWCI
15.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Medicinal Plants of the Russian Pharmacopoeia; their history and applications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jep.2014.04.007
The paper
Shikov, A. N., Pozharitskaya, O. N., Makarov, V. G., Wagner, H., Verpoorte, R., & Heinrich, M. (2014). Medicinal Plants of the Russian Pharmacopoeia; their history and applications. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2014.04.007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.