Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16027434›Full record

SynthesisCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2005

Probiotic therapy for the prevention and treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea: a systematic review.

Nandini Dendukuri, Vania Costa, Maurice McGregor, James M Brophy

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 37 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 203 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Probiotics for pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2006
    Pooled it
  7. Bacterial probiotics as an aid in the control of Clostridium difficile disease in neonatal pigs.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2016
    Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Bioscience of microbiota, food and health · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Guidelines forPrzeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Clinical update for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridium difficile infection.World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2014
    Review
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nandini DendukuriTechnology Assessment Unit, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montréal, Que. nandini.dendukuri@mcgill.ca
Vania Costa
Maurice McGregor
James M Brophy
McGill University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recent increase in the number and severity of cases of nosocomial Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) has prompted interest in the use of probiotics for the prevention and treatment of this disease. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of probiotic therapy.

methodsWe searched the PubMed, EMBASE, INAHTA, HEN and Cochrane Collaboration databases to identify trials in which the prevention or treatment of CDAD with probiotic therapy was the primary or secondary outcome. We extracted data on the number of patients randomly assigned to receive probiotic or placebo, the number of patients with CDAD, the type of probiotic, criteria for diagnosing CDAD, persistence of infection after treatment, compliance and adverse effects.

resultsWe identified 4 eligible studies in which prevention (n = 1) or treatment (n = 3) of CDAD was the primary outcome. The benefit of probiotic therapy seen in 2 of the studies was restricted to subgroups characterized by severe CDAD and increased use of vancomycin. The remaining 2 studies were too methodologically flawed for us to draw meaningful conclusions. We also identified 4 trials in which prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea with probiotics was the primary outcome and prevention of CDAD a secondary outcome. These studies were limited primarily by too few CDAD cases and provided no evidence of effective prophylaxis. Overall, heterogeneity in choice and dose of probiotic and in criteria for diagnosing CDAD makes it difficult to synthesize information from the 8 studies.

interpretationStudies conducted to date provide insufficient evidence for the routine clinical use of probiotics to prevent or treat CDAD. Better designed and larger studies are needed.

Indexed as

Clostridioides difficileCross InfectionDiarrheaEnterocolitis, PseudomembranousHumansPatient CompliancePlacebosProbioticsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomePlacebos

Identifiers

PMID16027434
PMCPMC1174857
OpenAlexW2164022200

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.