Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19088307›Full record

Trial reportApplied and environmental microbiology2009

Molecular ecological analysis of fecal bacterial populations from term infants fed formula supplemented with selected blends of prebiotics.

Noriko Nakamura, H Rex Gaskins, Chad T Collier, Gerardo M Nava, Deshanie Rai, Bryon Petschow, W Michael Russell, Cheryl Harris, Roderick I Mackie, Jennifer L Wampler and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Prebiotics in infants for prevention of allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Dosage-Related Prebiotic Effects of Inulin in Formula-Fed Infants.Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. The infant microbiome development: mom matters.Trends in molecular medicine · 2015
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Noriko NakamuraDivision of Nutritional Sciences, Institute for Genomic Biology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1207 W. Gregory Drive, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. nnakamur@illinois.edu
H Rex Gaskins
Chad T Collier
Gerardo M Nava
Deshanie Rai
Bryon Petschow
W Michael Russell
Cheryl Harris
Roderick I Mackie
Jennifer L Wampler
D Carey Walker
Mead Johnson (United States) · USCenter for Genomic Science · ITBristol-Myers Squibb (United States) · USUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Supplementation of infant formulas with prebiotic ingredients continues the effort to mimic functional properties of human milk. In this double-blind, controlled, 28-day study, healthy term infants received control formula (control group; n = 25) or control formula supplemented with polydextrose (PDX) and galactooligosaccharide (GOS) (4 g/liter) (PG4 group; n = 27) or with PDX, GOS, and lactulose (LOS) (either 4 g/liter [PGL4 group; n = 27] or 8 g/liter [PGL8 group; n = 25]). A parallel breast-fed group (BF group) (n = 30) was included. Stool characteristics, formula tolerance, and adverse events were monitored. Fecal bacterial subpopulations were evaluated by culture-based selective enumeration (Enterobacteriaceae), quantitative real-time PCR (Clostridium clusters I, XI, and XIV, Lactobacillus, and Bifidobacterium), and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) (Bifidobacterium). Fecal bacterial community profiles were examined by using 16S rRNA gene PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. The daily stool consistency was significantly softer or looser in the BF group than in all of the groups that received formula. The formulas were well tolerated, and the incidences of adverse events did not differ among feeding groups. Few significant changes in bacterial subpopulations were observed at any time point. The bacterial communities were stable; individual profiles tended to cluster by subject rather than by group. Post hoc analysis, however, demonstrated that the bacterial community profiles for subjects in the BF, PG4, PGL4, and PGL8 groups that first received formula at a younger age were less stable than the profiles for subjects in the same groups that received formula at an older age, but there was no difference for the control group. These data indicate that formulas containing PDX, GOS, and LOS blends are more likely to influence gut microbes when administration is begun in early infancy and justify further investigation of the age-related effects of these blends on fecal microbiota.

Indexed as

Colony Count, MicrobialInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaBacteriaDietary SupplementsDouble-Blind MethodElectrophoresisFecesGastrointestinal TractHumansInfantInfant FormulaInfant, NewbornIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescencePolymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID19088307
PMCPMC2643592
OpenAlexW2090148767

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.