Cited by 121Phytochemistry Medicinal Plant ApplicationsEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Plantas medicinais comercializadas por raizeiros no Centro de Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul

Open access
Nunes, G.P., Silva, M.F. da, Resende, U.M., Siqueira, J.M. de·2003·Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia

Abstract

Foi realizado um levantamento das plantas medicinais mais solicitadas a raizeiros do centro da cidade de Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, ou por eles indicadas. Esse levantamento foi efetuado em duas épocas distintas: 1992 e 2002. A compilação dos dados revelou que 27 espécies foram citadas em 1992 e 32 em 2002. As seis espécies mais freqüentemente consumidas (Maytenus cf. macrodonta, "cancorosa"; Baccharis trimera, "carqueja"; Achyrocline alata, "jateí-kaá"; Stryphnodendron adstringens, "barbatimão"; Cochlospermum regium, "algodãozinho", e Echinodorus macrophyllus, "chapéu-de-couro") foram adquiridas para identificação e avaliação preliminar da sua qualidade. Nas duas épocas, a qualidade das plantas medicinais apresentava itens que reprovavam seu consumo. Em ambos os levantamentos, observou-se uma constância das espécies mais utilizadas e uma coerência satisfatória com os dados disponíveis sobre os hábitos da automedicação da população do município. Os motivos e sintomas mais freqüentes para a aquisição de plantas medicinais foram os relacionados ao uso analgésico, sistemas genitourinário, respiratório e osteomuscular, dispepsia/má digestão e tecido conjuntivo.

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 · 10.1590/s0102-695x2003000200004

Cites

17 of 17 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 19 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–117 of 117

Metadata

Authors
Nunes, G. P., Silva, M. F. D., Resende, U. M., & Siqueira, J. M. D.
Affiliations
Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (BR)
Venue
Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia
Published
2003-12
Volume
13
Issue
2
ISSN
0102-695X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1588964954
Cited by
121
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Phytochemistry Medicinal Plant Applications
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Keywords
medicinal plants, self-medication, plant quality, Baccharis trimera, Achyrocline alata, Stryphnodendron adstringens, Cochlospermum regium, Echinodorus macrophyllus, analgesic use, Campo Grande

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