ოთხშაბათი, აპრილი 15, 2026
- Advertisement -
Google search engine
Global Ingredient Risk Index Botanical

Wild Yam

Dioscorea villosa

Also known as: Wild yam root, Dioscorea villosa extract, Wild yam root extract, Colic root

LOW RISK 2.0/10 How?

This ingredient is classified as unclassified risk.

02

Safety Profile

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
03

Interactions

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
04

Evidence and Scientific Findings

Overview

Ingredient Overview

Wild yam root contains diosgenin, a steroidal saponin. The body cannot convert diosgenin to progesterone; wild yam cream has no proven hormonal activity. Oral supplements are generally well tolerated. High doses may cause nausea and vomiting. Weak estrogenic activity is possible — caution in hormone-sensitive conditions.

Classification

Biological and Chemical Classification

Scientific Name
Dioscorea villosa
Mechanism

Mechanism of Action

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

Clinical Evidence

Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

Pharmacokinetics

Pharmacokinetics

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

Dosage

Recommended Dosage

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
05

SETI — Scientific Evidence Transparency Index

SETI Score 50/100
Risk Level High risk
Scientific Confidence Low
Evidence Strength Limited
Key Benefit Botanical
Evidence Reviewed 10 PubMed studies
Scientific Confidence Low
Based on study quality, consistency, and recency

Executive Summary — Ingredient Assessment

SETI Score 50/100
Risk Level High risk
Evidence Strength Limited
Main Benefit Botanical
Ingredient Wild Yam
Scientific name Dioscorea villosa
Scientific Evidence Overview
  • 10 studies reviewed
  • 0 high-quality studies (meta-analysis or RCT)
  • Main clinical benefit observed: Botanical
  • Evidence consistency: High consistency across studies (100%)
Safety Signals
  • No significant safety signals identified in the reviewed literature.
Evidence Strength Limited
Final Scientific Assessment

The available scientific evidence for Wild Yam indicates notable safety signals that warrant caution. Use should be considered carefully and monitored, particularly in sensitive populations or alongside other medications.

Ingredient Wild Yam
Evidence reviewed 10 peer-reviewed studies (last 10 years)
Scientific name Dioscorea villosa
50 /100

Total SETI Score

High risk
Evidence quality 10/40
Evidence consistency 20/20
Safety signals 0/20
Study recency 10/10
Evidence transparency 10/10

Evidence Summary

  • 10 studies reviewed
  • 0 high-quality studies (meta-analysis or systematic review)
  • 0 studies identified benefits or no safety concern (GREEN)
  • 10 studies reported limited or advisory safety evidence (YELLOW)

Evidence Policy

Only peer-reviewed scientific literature indexed in PubMed or comparable databases is included in this evaluation. Commercial websites, blogs, and marketing materials are excluded. All references include direct traceable links to source documents.

Last updated: 06 აპრ 2026, 12:11

Evidence Distribution

10 Other / unclassified
  1. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    The Combination of Diosgenin, Vitamin D, and u03b1-Lactalbumin Normalizes the Menstrual Cycle in Women with PCOS of Phenotype D: A Pilot Clinical… ↗
    PMID 41373986 ↗
    Journal Nutrients
    Year 2025
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41373986/
    Russo M et al.. The Combination of Diosgenin, Vitamin D, and u03b1-Lactalbumin Normalizes the Menstrual Cycle in Women with PCOS of Phenotype D: A Pilot Clinical Study.. Nutrients. 2025. PMID:41373986.
  2. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Chemosensitization and Molecular Docking Assessment of Dio-NPs on Resistant Breast Cancer Cells to Tamoxifen. ↗
    PMID 40283888 ↗
    Journal Pharmaceuticals (Basel)
    Year 2025
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40283888/
    Abd-Elghany AA et al.. Chemosensitization and Molecular Docking Assessment of Dio-NPs on Resistant Breast Cancer Cells to Tamoxifen.. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2025. PMID:40283888.
  3. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Herbal Treatment of Female Urogenital Atrophy: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis. ↗
    PMID 38211573 ↗
    Journal Complement Med Res
    Year 2024
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38211573/
    Ritzmann D. Herbal Treatment of Female Urogenital Atrophy: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.. Complement Med Res. 2024. PMID:38211573.
  4. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Physicochemical Properties of Wild Yam (Dioscorea villosa) Starch. ↗
    PMID 37810947 ↗
    Journal Int J Food Sci
    Year 2023
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37810947/
    Oladebeye AO et al.. Physicochemical Properties of Wild Yam (Dioscorea villosa) Starch.. Int J Food Sci. 2023. PMID:37810947.
  5. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Dioscorea Villosa (Wild Yam) Root Extract. ↗
    PMID 37751575 ↗
    Journal Int J Toxicol
    Year 2023
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37751575/
    Raj PS et al.. Dioscorea Villosa (Wild Yam) Root Extract.. Int J Toxicol. 2023. PMID:37751575.
  6. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Phyto-progestins for the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding without organic cause in women at high risk for breast cancer and breast cancer… ↗
    PMID 37494965 ↗
    Journal Gynecol Endocrinol
    Year 2023
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37494965/
    Grandi G et al.. Phyto-progestins for the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding without organic cause in women at high risk for breast cancer and breast cancer survivors: a prospective, pilot study.. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2023. PMID:37494965.
  7. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Biosynthetic Gene Expression and Tissue Distribution of Diosgenin in Dioscorea japonica. ↗
    PMID 36753603 ↗
    Journal J Agric Food Chem
    Year 2023
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36753603/
    Onoda K et al.. Biosynthetic Gene Expression and Tissue Distribution of Diosgenin in Dioscorea japonica.. J Agric Food Chem. 2023. PMID:36753603.
  8. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Probiotic Characterization of Indigenous Kocuria flava Y4 Strain Isolated from Dioscorea villosa Leaves. ↗
    PMID 34825308 ↗
    Journal Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins
    Year 2023
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34825308/
    Barik A et al.. Probiotic Characterization of Indigenous Kocuria flava Y4 Strain Isolated from Dioscorea villosa Leaves.. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2023. PMID:34825308.
  9. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Gracillin Shows Potential Efficacy Against Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Through Inhibiting the mTOR Pathway. ↗
    PMID 35392243 ↗
    Journal Front Oncol
    Year 2022
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35392243/
    Li Y et al.. Gracillin Shows Potential Efficacy Against Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Through Inhibiting the mTOR Pathway.. Front Oncol. 2022. PMID:35392243.
  10. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Purification and Optimization of Extracellular Lipase from a Novel Strain Kocuria flava Y4. ↗
    PMID 35169395 ↗
    Journal Int J Anal Chem
    Year 2022
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35169395/
    Barik A et al.. Purification and Optimization of Extracellular Lipase from a Novel Strain Kocuria flava Y4.. Int J Anal Chem. 2022. PMID:35169395.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
06

Score Transparency

Q × L × D × S × 10 = 2.0 / 10

The GIRI Score is the product of four independently computed evidence components, each normalised to 0–1, then scaled to 0–10. Every component is derived exclusively from peer-reviewed references and regulatory data — no editorial judgement is applied.

Q
Evidence Quantity 0 / 10
0%

0 of 10 approved references (score saturates at 10). More peer-reviewed studies = stronger evidence base.

Method: Q = number of approved references ÷ 10 (capped at 1.0)

L
Evidence Quality 5 / 10
50%

Limited — mostly case reports or animal studies

Method: L = mean study-level weight across approved references. Level 1 (meta-analysis / systematic review) = 1.0; Level 2 (RCT) = 0.8; Level 3 (cohort/case-control) = 0.6; Level 4 (case report) = 0.4; Level 5 (animal / in-vitro) = 0.2.

D
Evidence Direction 5 / 10
Benefit
Risk
50%

Mixed or neutral — roughly equal benefit and risk signals

Method: D = (sum of risk-scored references − sum of benefit-scored references) ÷ total evidence score, then scaled from [−1, 1] to [0, 1]. 0.0 = pure benefit; 0.5 = neutral; 1.0 = pure risk.

S
Safety Signals 5 / 10
50%

One or more monitoring-level safety signals active

Method: S = 0.5 (neutral baseline) + sum of active signal severity deltas ÷ 10. Severity deltas: Critical = +2.0, High = +1.5, Moderate = +1.0, Low = +0.5. Capped at 1.0.

0Q × 5L × 5D × 5S = 2.0 / 10

Final GIRI Score for Wild Yam. Risk level thresholds: Low 0–3.0 · Moderate 3.0–5.5 · High 5.5–7.5 · Critical 7.5–10.

Full methodology & data sources

The GIRI Score is computed entirely from structured data — no editorial scoring or subjective weighting is applied at any step.

  • References: Only approved references are counted. Each reference is assigned an evidence level (L1–L5) and a direction (risk / neutral / benefit) by the reference manager or AI classifier.
  • Safety Signals: Sourced from regulatory agencies (FDA, EMA, Health Canada, TGA, and others) and pharmacovigilance databases. Only active signals count toward the score.
  • Formula version: GIRI Score v3.7.0 — Q × L × D × S × 10.
  • Limitations: The score reflects published evidence and recorded signals as of the last update date. It is not a clinical risk assessment and should not replace advice from a qualified healthcare professional.
07

Risk Level Classification

LOW RISK 2.0/10

Based on available regulatory signals and scientific evidence, this ingredient presents a low safety concern under normal conditions of use.

LOW
0–3.0
MODERATE
3.0–5.5
HIGH
5.5–7.5
CRITICAL
7.5–10
2.0

The score pin shows exactly where this ingredient falls on the fixed risk scale.

What drove the Low classification for Wild Yam

GIRI Score 2.0 / 10

A score of 2.0 places this ingredient in the Low band. Thresholds: Low 0–3.0 · Moderate 3.0–5.5 · High 5.5–7.5 · Critical 7.5–10.

Evidence Quantity (Q) 0 / 10 refs

0 approved references.

Evidence Quality (L) 50%

Limited — mostly case reports or animal studies (Level 4–5).

Evidence Direction (D) 50% toward risk

Neutral or mixed — benefit and risk signals roughly balanced.

Safety Signals (S) 0 active signals

No active signals — S component is at neutral baseline (0.5), contributing no extra risk weight.

Regulatory Status No restrictions found

No major regulatory restrictions or advisories recorded across monitored jurisdictions (FDA, EMA, Health Canada, TGA, and others).

How are the Low / Moderate / High / Critical thresholds defined?

The four risk levels are fixed score bands. A score is assigned to exactly one level based on where it falls:

LevelScoreMeaning
LOW0.0 – 2.9Sparse or predominantly beneficial evidence. No active safety alerts.
MODERATE3.0 – 5.4Mixed signals — some risk alongside benefit. Caution at high doses or in sensitive groups.
HIGH5.5 – 7.4Multiple studies or regulatory alerts documenting adverse effects. Professional oversight recommended.
CRITICAL7.5 – 10Regulatory restrictions in one or more major jurisdictions. Serious documented harm. Avoid without specialist supervision.

Thresholds are fixed constants (GIRI_Score_Utils::LEVEL_THRESHOLDS). They do not change per ingredient and are never subject to editorial adjustment.

← Back to Ingredient Database

ბოლო სიახლეები

პოპულარული ამბები

კატეგორიები

ჩვენ შესახებ

info@accreditation.ge
ჩვენს შესახებ / რეკლამა / კონტაქტი

გამოგვყევი სოციალურ ქსელებში

© SheniEkimi.ge