Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26467550›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2016

Quantitative Risk-Benefit Analysis of Probiotic Use for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

William E Bennett

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

William E BennettSection of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, 410 W. 10th Street, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. webjr@iu.edu.
Indiana University School of Medicine

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics have seen widespread use for a variety of gastrointestinal problems, especially in two common disorders: irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease. Since a wide variety of probiotic preparations has been used, and despite a large number of studies performed, a great deal of heterogeneity exists among them. Straightforward evidence-based recommendations for the use of probiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease have thus been difficult to formulate. In an effort to improve understanding of the risk-benefit balance of probiotics in these conditions, this study (1) queried the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database for all reported adverse drug events related to probiotics in 2013, and (2) constructed risk-benefit planes for both irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease using a geometric approximation of the confidence region between risk and benefit. The results show that adverse events from probiotics vary widely by disease, and when they occur, they are mild and may be difficult to distinguish from the natural history of the underlying disorders they are used to treat. The risk-benefit plane for irritable bowel syndrome straddles the risk-benefit threshold, so patients can expect a balance between a low chance of risk and also a low chance of benefit. The risk-benefit plane for inflammatory bowel disease largely lies above the risk-benefit threshold, so patients may expect more benefit than risk in most cases. More standardized and high-quality research is needed to improve our understanding of risk and benefit for these complex biopharmaceuticals.

Indexed as

HumansInflammatory Bowel DiseasesIrritable Bowel SyndromeProbioticsRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID26467550
OpenAlexW1909295674

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.