Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27495104›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2016

Probiotics for prevention and treatment of respiratory tract infections in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Yizhong Wang, Xiaolu Li, Ting Ge, Yongmei Xiao, Yang Liao, Yun Cui, Yucai Zhang, Wenzhe Ho, Guangjun Yu, Ting Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 108 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
108citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
25.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

108 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 199 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Probiotics for preventing acute otitis media in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Safety ofNutrients · 2026
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

48 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yizhong WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Shanghai Children's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, PR China Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA Department of Children's Healthcare, Shanghai Children's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, PR China.
Xiaolu Li
Ting Ge
Yongmei Xiao
Yang Liao
Yun Cui
Yucai Zhang
Wenzhe Ho
Guangjun Yu
Ting Zhang
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNShanghai Children's Hospital · CNTemple University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRespiratory tract infections (RTIs) represent one of the main health problems in children. Probiotics are viable bacteria that colonize the intestine and affect the host intestinal microbial balance. Accumulating evidence suggests that probiotic consumption may decrease the incidence of or modify RTIs. The authors systematically reviewed data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the effect of probiotic consumption on RTIs in children.

methodsMEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for RCTs regarding the effect of probiotics on RTIs in children. The outcomes included number of children experienced with at least 1 RTI episode, duration of illness episodes, days of illness per subject, and school/day care absenteeism due to infection. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled relative risks, or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).

resultsA total of 23 trials involving 6269 children were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. None of the trials showed a high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence of outcomes was moderate. The age range of subjects was from newborn to 18 years. The results of meta-analysis showed that probiotic consumption significantly decreased the number of subjects having at least 1 RTI episode (17 RCTs, 4513 children, relative risk 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96, P = 0.004). Children supplemented with probiotics had fewer numbers of days of RTIs per person compared with children who had taken a placebo (6 RCTs, 2067 children, MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.02, P = 0.03), and had fewer numbers of days absent from day care/school (8 RCTs, 1499 children, MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.72 to -0.15, P = 0.02). However, there was no statistically significant difference of illness episode duration between probiotic intervention group and placebo group (9 RCTs, 2817 children, MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.49 to 0.30, P = 0.19).

conclusionBased on the available data and taking into account the safety profile of RCTs, probiotic consumption appears to be a feasible way to decrease the incidence of RTIs in children.

Indexed as

AbsenteeismChildHumansProbioticsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRespiratory Tract Infections

Identifiers

PMID27495104
PMCPMC4979858
OpenAlexW2499847296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.