Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26431716›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in biotechnology2016

Prebiotics: why definitions matter.

Robert W Hutkins, Janina A Krumbeck, Laure B Bindels, Patrice D Cani, George Fahey, Yong Jun Goh, Bruce Hamaker, Eric C Martens, David A Mills, Robert A Rastal and 2 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 159 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
159citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

159 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

99 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

12 authors.

Robert W HutkinsDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0919, USA. Electronic address: rhutkins1@unl.edu.
Janina A KrumbeckDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0919, USA; School of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0919, USA.
Laure B BindelsMetabolism and Nutrition Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Patrice D CaniUniversité Catholique de Louvain, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Metabolism and Nutrition Research Group, WELBIO (Walloon Excellence in Life Sciences and Biotechnology), Av. E. Mounier, 73 B1.73.11, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium.
George FaheyDepartment of Animal Science, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.
Yong Jun GohDepartment of Food, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.
Bruce HamakerWhistler Center for Carbohydrate Research, Department of Food Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Eric C MartensDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
David A MillsDepartment of Food Science & Technology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Robert A RastalDepartment of Food and Nutritional Sciences, The University of Reading, PO Box 226, Whiteknights, Reading RG6 6AP, United Kingdom.
Elaine VaughanSensus BV (Royal Cosun), Borchwerf 3, 4704RG Roosendaal, The Netherlands.
Mary Ellen SandersDairy & Food Culture Technologies, Centennial, CO 80122, USA.

Funding

Activation of probiotic bifidobacteria by milk glyansR01AT008759 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI GERMAN, BRUCE, LEBRILLA, CARLITO B · 2014 to 2018
$4.2M
Mechanism of Activation of Probiotic Bifidobacteria by Prebiotic Milk GlycansR01AT007079 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI GERMAN, BRUCE, LEBRILLA, CARLITO B · 2012 to 2016
$2.2M
European Research Council 336452NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT007079NCCIH NIH HHS R01AT007079NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT008759NCCIH NIH HHS R01AT008759
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prebiotic concept was introduced twenty years ago, and despite several revisions to the original definition, the scientific community has continued to debate what it means to be a prebiotic. How prebiotics are defined is important not only for the scientific community, but also for regulatory agencies, the food industry, consumers and healthcare professionals. Recent developments in community-wide sequencing and glycomics have revealed that more complex interactions occur between putative prebiotic substrates and the gut microbiota than previously considered. A consensus among scientists on the most appropriate definition of a prebiotic is necessary to enable continued use of the term.

Indexed as

PrebioticsAnimalsCommunity ParticipationFood IndustryGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansPrebiotics

Identifiers

PMID26431716
PMCPMC4744122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.