SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2016
Contemporary meta-analysis of short-term probiotic consumption on gastrointestinal transit.
Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Microbiota profile and efficacy of probiotic supplementation on laxation in adults affected by Prader-Willi Syndrome: A randomized, double-blind, crossover trial.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2020Trial
- Bacillus coagulans Unique IS2 in Constipation: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Gut microbiota-metabolism axis in digestive tumors: Emerging targets for novel therapies (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Review
- The activity of miltefosine combined with oral probiotics in a mouse model of cutaneous leishmaniasis.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2025Article
- Influence of the gut microbiome on lymphoma treatment: current evidence and future therapeutic directions.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Review
- The Efficacy of Probiotics Supplementation on the Quality of Life of Patients with Gastrointestinal Disease: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.Preventive nutrition and food science · 2024Review
- Bacillus clausii for Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Narrative Literature Review.Advances in therapy · 2022Review
- Microbiota in health and diseases.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2022Review
- Review
- Effects ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
- Gut microbiota: A new target for T2DM prevention and treatment.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Review
- Improvement in Lactose Tolerance in Hypolactasic Subjects Consuming Ice Creams with High or Low Concentrations ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Nutraceuticals as modulators of gut microbiota: Role in therapy.British journal of pharmacology · 2020Review
- Recent advances in modulating the microbiome.F1000Research · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo determine the efficacy of probiotic supplementation on intestinal transit time (ITT) in adults and to identify factors that influence these outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of probiotic supplementation that measured ITT in adults. Study quality was assessed using the Jadad scale. A random effects meta-analysis was performed with standardized mean difference (SMD) of ITT between probiotic and control groups as the primary outcome. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses examined the impact of moderator variables on SMD of ITT.
resultsA total of 15 clinical trials with 17 treatment effects representing 675 subjects were included in this analysis. Probiotic supplementation was moderately efficacious in decreasing ITT compared to control, with an SMD of 0.38 (95%CI: 0.23-0.53, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated statistically greater reductions in ITT with probiotics in subjects with vs without constipation (SMD: 0.57 vs 0.22, P < 0.01) and in studies with high vs low study quality (SMD: 0.45 vs 0.00, P = 0.01). Constipation (R (2) = 38%, P < 0.01), higher study quality (R (2) = 31%, P = 0.01), older age (R (2) = 27%, P = 0.02), higher percentage of female subjects (R (2) = 26%, P = 0.02), and fewer probiotic strains (R (2) = 20%, P < 0.05) were predictive of decreased ITT with probiotics in meta-regression. Medium to large treatment effects were identified with B. lactis HN019 (SMD: 0.67, P < 0.001) and B. lactis DN-173 010 (SMD: 0.54, P < 0.01) while other probiotic strains yielded negligible reductions in ITT relative to control.
conclusionProbiotic supplementation is moderately efficacious for reducing ITT in adults. Probiotics were most efficacious in constipated subjects, when evaluated in high-quality studies, and with certain probiotic strains.
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.