Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11953334›Full record

ReviewGut2002

Probiotics: a role in the treatment of intestinal infection and inflammation?

E Isolauri, P V Kirjavainen, S Salminen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Gut, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

93 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Characteristics and biological control functions ofAnimal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2023
    Article
  18. Fasting: From Physiology to Pathology.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

E IsolauriDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Turku, Finland. erika.isolauri@utu.fi
P V Kirjavainen
S Salminen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotic therapy is based on the concept of normal healthy microflora. The development of novel means of characterising the gut microflora, in particular those based on the different levels of conservation in the ribosomal RNA sequences of different genera, have opened up new angles on the role of the gut microflora in health and disease. Components of the human intestinal microflora or organisms entering the intestine may have harmful or beneficial effects on human health. Abundant evidence implies that specific strains selected from the healthy gut microflora exhibit powerful antipathogenic and anti-inflammatory capabilities, and are consequently involved with enhanced colonisation resistance in the intestine. Realisation of this has led to the introduction of novel modes of therapeutic and prophylactic intervention based on the consumption of mono and mixed cultures of beneficial live microorganisms as probiotics.

Indexed as

BifidobacteriumLactobacillusAcute DiseaseAntigensBacterial InfectionsEnteritisHumansIntestinesProbioticsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntigens

Identifiers

PMID11953334
PMCPMC1867676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.