| Title |
Plant-Based Medicines for Anxiety Disorders, Part 2: A Review of Clinical Studies with Supporting Preclinical Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
CNS Drugs, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40263-013-0059-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jerome Sarris, Erica McIntyre, David A. Camfield |
| Abstract |
Research in the area of herbal psychopharmacology has revealed a variety of promising medicines that may provide benefit in the treatment of general anxiety and specific anxiety disorders. However, a comprehensive review of plant-based anxiolytics has been absent to date. Thus, our aim was to provide a comprehensive narrative review of plant-based medicines that have clinical and/or preclinical evidence of anxiolytic activity. We present the article in two parts. In part one, we reviewed herbal medicines for which only preclinical investigations for anxiolytic activity have been performed. In this current article (part two), we review herbal medicines for which there have been both preclinical and clinical investigations of anxiolytic activity. A search of MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted (up to 28 October 2012) for English language papers using the search terms 'anxiety' OR 'anxiety disorder' OR 'generalized anxiety disorder' OR 'social phobia' OR 'post-traumatic stress disorder' OR 'panic disorder' OR 'agoraphobia' OR 'obsessive compulsive disorder' in combination with the search terms 'Herb*' OR 'Medicinal Plants' OR 'Botanical Medicine' OR 'Chinese herb*', in addition to individual herbal medicines. This search of the literature revealed 1,525 papers, of which 53 plants were included in the review (having at least one study using the whole plant extract). Of these plants, 21 had human clinical trial evidence (reviewed here in part two), with the other 32 having solely preclinical evidence (reviewed in part one). Support for efficacy was found for chronic use (i.e. greater than one day) of the following herbs in treating a range of anxiety disorders in human clinical trials: Piper methysticum, Matricaria recutita, Ginkgo biloba, Scutellaria lateriflora, Silybum marianum, Passiflora incarnata, Withania somniferum, Galphimia glauca, Centella asiatica, Rhodiola rosea, Echinacea spp., Melissa officinalis and Echium amoenum. For several of the plants studied, conclusions need to be tempered due to methodological issues such as small sample sizes, brief intervention durations and non-replication. Current evidence does not support Hypericum perforatum or Valeriana spp. for any anxiety disorder. Acute anxiolytic activity was found for Centella asiatica, Salvia spp., Melissa officinalis, Passiflora incarnata and Citrus aurantium. Bacopa monnieri has shown anxiolytic effects in people with cognitive decline. The therapeutic application of psychotropic plant-based treatments for anxiety disorders is also discussed, specifically Psychotria viridis and Banisteriopsis caarti (ayahuasca), Psilocybe spp. and cannabidiol-enriched (low tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ(9)-THC)) Cannabis spp. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 21% |
| United States | 5 | 18% |
| Australia | 3 | 11% |
| Canada | 2 | 7% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| Japan | 1 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 36% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 537 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 525 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 128 | 24% |
| Researcher | 67 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 66 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 42 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 6% |
| Other | 92 | 17% |
| Unknown | 108 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 154 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 61 | 11% |
| Psychology | 35 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 33 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 5% |
| Other | 101 | 19% |
| Unknown | 124 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2024.
All research outputs
#750,322
of 25,383,225 outputs
Outputs from CNS Drugs
#52
of 1,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,241
of 201,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CNS Drugs
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,225 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 201,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.