4.7 Review

Aloe veraand health outcomes: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Journal

PHYTOTHERAPY RESEARCH
Volume 35, Issue 2, Pages 555-576

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ptr.6833

Keywords

Aloe vera; benefit; credibility assessment; health outcome; umbrella review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This umbrella review aimed to summarize the effects of Aloe vera on health outcomes and found that only a few outcomes were supported by highly suggestive evidence, with the majority limited by small sample size and poor methodological quality.
This umbrella review aims to summarize the effects ofAloe veraon health outcomes and assess the strength of evidence. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, CINAHL, and AMED were searched from inception to October, 2019 for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials that investigated the effects ofAloe veraon health outcomes. Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed the methodological quality, and rated the credibility of evidence according to established criteria. Ten articles reporting 71 unique outcomes ofAloe verawere included. Of these, 47 (67%) were nominally statistically significant based on random-effects model (p <= .05). Only 3 outcomes were supported by highly suggestive evidence, whereas 42 outcomes were supported by weak evidence. The highly suggestive evidence supported benefits ofAloe verain the prevention of second-degree infusion phlebitis (RR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.10-0.32,p-value: 1.75 x 10(-9)) and chemotherapy-induced phlebitis based on overall incidence (OR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.20,p-value: 9.68 x 10(-20)) and incidence of the second degree of severity (OR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.07-0.14,p-value: 3.41 x 10(-35)). However, the majority of the evidence were limited by small sample size and poor methodological quality. Therefore, despite the overall favorable effect ofAloe vera,more robust studies are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available