Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27571098›Full record

ReviewNutrients2016

Distant Site Effects of Ingested Prebiotics.

Stephanie Collins, Gregor Reid

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. The Effect ofNeuroSci · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. The Biotherapeutic Potential of a Novel ProbioticJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Awareness, Knowledge, and Interest about Prebiotics-A Study among Romanian Consumers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Stephanie CollinsDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5C1, Canada. scolli69@uwo.ca.
Gregor ReidDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5C1, Canada. gregor@uwo.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gut microbiome is being more widely recognized for its association with positive health outcomes, including those distant to the gastrointestinal system. This has given the ability to maintain and restore microbial homeostasis a new significance. Prebiotic compounds are appealing for this purpose as they are generally food-grade substances only degraded by microbes, such as bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, from which beneficial short-chain fatty acids are produced. Saccharides such as inulin and other fructo-oligosaccharides, galactooligosaccharides, and polydextrose have been widely used to improve gastrointestinal outcomes, but they appear to also influence distant sites. This review examined the effects of prebiotics on bone strength, neural and cognitive processes, immune functioning, skin, and serum lipid profile. The mode of action is in part affected by intestinal permeability and by fermentation products reaching target cells. As the types of prebiotics available diversify, so too will our understanding of the range of microbes able to degrade them, and the extent to which body sites can be impacted by their consumption.

Indexed as

FermentationGastrointestinal MicrobiomeAnimalsBacteriaBone DensityBone RemodelingCognitionGastrointestinal TractHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansImmune SystemLipidsNervous SystemPrebioticsSkinLipidsPrebioticsbonebraincardiovascularimmunemicrobiomeprebiotics

Identifiers

PMID27571098
PMCPMC5037510

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.