Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2006
Role of a probiotic (Saccharomyces boulardii) in management and prevention of diarrhoea.
Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of probiotics for treatment of acute or persistent diarrhoea in children from birth till 10 years: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of global health · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Safety of Saccharomyces Boulardii for the Treatment of Acute Gastroenteritis in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- AGA Technical Review on the Role of Probiotics in the Management of Gastrointestinal Disorders.Gastroenterology · 2020Guideline
- The use of probiotics in pediatric gastroenterology: a review of the literature and recommendations by Latin-American experts.Paediatric drugs · 2015Pooled it
- Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of Saccharomyces boulardii in Infants and Children With Acute Diarrhea.The Pediatric infectious disease journal · 2020Trial
- The Role of Probiotics in the Treatment of Dysentery: a Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2017Trial
- Efficacy and safety of Saccharomyces boulardii in acute childhood diarrhea: a double blind randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2012Trial
- Probiotics in the treatment of acute rotavirus diarrhoea. A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial using two different probiotic preparations in Bolivian children.BMC infectious diseases · 2010Trial
- Clinical efficacy comparison of Saccharomyces boulardii and yogurt fluid in acute non-bloody diarrhea in children: a randomized, controlled, open label study.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2010Trial
- A placebo-controlled study of the effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. boulardii CNCM I-1079 probiotic on faecal quality, microbiota and immunity in weaned kittens.Animal microbiome · 2026Article
- Bacterial-Fungal Interactions: Mutualism, Antagonism, and Competition.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Alterations in the Gut Fungal Community in a Mouse Model of Huntington's Disease.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Probiotic YeastJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Which Probiotic Is the Most Effective for Treating Acute Diarrhea in Children? A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Effect ofPediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2021Article
- Retrospective analysis of EMR database to assess the effectiveness ofNew microbes and new infections · 2020Article
- Review
- Diversity ofWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the efficacy and safety of Saccharomyces boulardii (S. boulardii) in acute watery diarrhoea and its role in reducing the frequency of episodes of diarrhoea in subsequent two months.
methodsChildren from 2 mo to 12 years of age, with acute diarrhoea were selected according to inclusion criteria and randomised in S. boulardii group (treated with ORS, nutritional support and S. boulardii, 250 mg bid) and in control group (treated with ORS and nutritional support only). Active treatment phase was 5 d and each child was followed for two months afterwards. Frequency and consistency of stools as well as safety of drug was assessed on every visit. A comparison of two groups was done in terms of number of diarrhoeal episode in subsequent two months.
resultsThere were fifty patients in each group. Baseline characteristics such as mean age and the average frequency of stools were comparable in S. boulardii and control group at the time of inclusion in the trial. By d 3 it reduced to 2.7 and 4.2 stools per d respectively and by d 6 it reduced to 1.6 (S. boulardii Group) and 3.3 (control group). The duration of diarrhoea was 3.6 d in S. boulardii group whereas it was 4.8 d in control group (P = 0.001). In the following two months, S. boulardii group had a significantly lower frequency of 0.54 episodes as compared to 1.08 episodes in control group. The drug was well accepted and tolerated. There were no reports of the side effects during treatment period.
conclusionS. boulardii significantly reduces the frequency and duration of acute diarrhoea. The consistency of stool also improves. The drug is well-tolerated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.