Home › Research › Disparities
Herbs commonly used by women: an evidence-based review
Tesch BJ.. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2003-05-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objective To review the evidence of herbs commonly used by women. Data sources Articles were located by searching Medline, Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, and the Combined Health Information Database and by hand searching the reference lists of recent systematic reviews. The databases were searched in January 2000 and October 2000 by using the Latin and common name of each herb. Methods of study selection Preference was given to randomized, placebo-controlled trials. When available, English language studies were reviewed. If not, data are presented from review articles that summarize the foreign study. Results Many women use herbal therapies. In the United States, herbs are considered dietary supplements. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cannot remove them from the market unless they are proven unsafe. The herb industry plans to improve monitoring. Many prospective randomized controlled trials are being funded. Gingko biloba seems to slow the progression of dementia but increases the risk of bleeding. St John's Wort is efficacious for treating mild to moderate depression but has many drug interactions. Ginseng seems to improve well being in perimenopausal women, but it is often impure and has side effects and drug interactions. Garlic slightly lowers blood pressure and lipids. Echinacea slightly decreases the duration of colds but does not prevent them. Valerian is beneficial for insomnia, but there is no long-term safety data. Black cohosh may help the symptoms of perimenopause, and chasteberry may improve premenstrual syndrome. More study is needed on both herbs. Conclusion Some herbs are medically useful, but the American public would benefit from increased regulation. Manufacturers should be able to ensure that herbs contain pure ingredients. Side effects and drug interactions should be listed. Well-designed studies are being conducted. The results will be helpful to physicians and patients when the clinical evidence becomes available.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Tesch, B. J. (2003). Herbs commonly used by women: an evidence-based review. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2003.402
Vancouver
Tesch BJ. Herbs commonly used by women: an evidence-based review. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2003. doi:10.1067/mob.2003.402. PMID: 12748451.
BibTeX
@article{tesch2003-12748451,
author = {Tesch, B. J.},
title = {{Herbs commonly used by women: an evidence-based review}},
journal = {American journal of obstetrics and gynecology},
year = {2003},
doi = {10.1067/mob.2003.402},
pmid = {12748451},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2003.402}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The results will be helpful to physicians and patients when the clinical evidence becomes available.
Why it matters
This review of herbs commonly used by women reports that ginkgo biloba seems to slow the progression of dementia but increases the risk of bleeding. It summarizes limited evidence on one herb and does not establish a treatment, cure, or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Disparities →
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (American journal of obstetrics and gynecology) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology: journal h-index 383 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2003 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 5 / 7 | Cited 118 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 4.7 citations a year over 25 year(s) since 2003 |
| Impact for its field and year | 5 / 6 | Cited 23.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 1 / 4 | Cited 5 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 1 / 4 | Last-listed author Bonnie J. Tesch: h-index 6 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | Medical College of Wisconsin: institution h-index 747 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 12748451) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Disparities
Also in Disparities
98 studies in the library are filed under Disparities with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Disparities hub.