![]() They lack statistical rigour and are simple percentage calculations. The effect of the sample size on the dispersal of data and the differential probability of botanical drugs being used for the different categories of use are not being considered by these indices. ![]() Their statistical rigour is explained and the relevance for ethnobotany, ethnopharmacology and drug discovery discussed. The FL, RI, UV/CI, CV and the RFC are shortly reviewed. Moreover, the question whether a simple number can summarize the cultural value or importance of plants is not only mathematical but also epistemological. This is, however, doubtful, as these indices have not been developed by statisticians, nor by pharmacologists while a proof of concept is lacking. These indices are claimed to serve as a proxy for efficacy or drug discovery (Fidelity Level ‘FL’) and to show the importance of botanical drugs and plants used as medicines (Relative Importance ‘RI’, Use Value ‘UV’ or Cultural Importance Index ‘CI’, Cultural Value Index ‘CV’, Relative Frequency of Citation ‘RFC’). A range of ethnobotanical indices are frequently used to transform primary data obtained through field studies into statistical measures. ![]() As an interdisciplinary field of research ethnopharmacology draws on methodologies and methods from a variety of disciplines. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |