SynthesisPloS one2016
Methodological Quality Assessment of Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Probiotics in Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Pouchitis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiome Changes after Type 2 Diabetes Treatment: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Pooled it
- Probiotics as a Coadjuvant Factor in Active or Quiescent Inflammatory Bowel Disease of Adults-A Meta-Analytical Study.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- Hypothyroidism and related diseases: a methodological quality assessment of meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Gut Microecological Prescription: A Novel Approach to Regulating Intestinal Micro-Ecological Balance.International journal of general medicine · 2025Review
- Lactic Acid Bacteria-Gut-Microbiota-Mediated Intervention towards Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Role of probiotics in prevention and treatment of enteric infections: a comprehensive review.3 Biotech · 2021Review
- Article
- Nutraceuticals as modulators of gut microbiota: Role in therapy.British journal of pharmacology · 2020Review
- Microbial-Based and Microbial-Targeted Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Review
- Probiotics in the next-generation sequencing era.Gut microbes · 2020Review
- Antibiotics and probiotics in inflammatory bowel disease: when to use them?Frontline gastroenterology · 2020Review
- Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017.Saudi medical journal · 2019Article
- The Gut-Brain Axis: Influence of Microbiota on Mood and Mental Health.Integrative medicine (Encinitas, Calif.) · 2018Article
- A Probiotic for Ulcerative Colitis: The Culture Wars Continue.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Article
- Paper incompletely describes evidence-based usage of probiotics.Gut microbes · 2018Article
- Probiotics and Their Potential Preventive and Therapeutic Role for Cancer, High Serum Cholesterol, and Allergic and HIV Diseases.BioMed research international · 2018Review
- Butyrate-producing bacteria supplemented in vitro to Crohn's disease patient microbiota increased butyrate production and enhanced intestinal epithelial barrier integrity.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProbiotics are widely used for the induction and maintenance of remission in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and pouchitis. There are a large number of meta-analyses (MAs)/ systematic reviews (SRs) on this subject, the methodological quality of which has not been evaluated.
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the methodological quality of and summarize the evidence obtained from MAs/SRs of probiotic treatments for IBD and pouchitis patients.
methodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched to identify Chinese and English language MAs/SRs of the use of probiotics for IBD and pouchitis. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies.
resultsA total of 36 MAs/SRs were evaluated. The AMSTAR scores of the included studies ranged from 1 to 10, and the average score was 5.81. According to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 4 articles were classified as high quality, 24 articles were classified as moderate quality, and 8 articles were classified as low quality. Most of the MAs/SRs suggested that probiotics had potential benefits for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), but failed to show effectiveness in the induction and maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease (CD). The probiotic preparation VSL#3 may play a beneficial role in pouchitis.
conclusionThe overall methodological quality of the current MAs/SRs in the field of probiotics for IBD and pouchitis was found to be low to moderate. More MAs/SRs of high quality are required to support using probiotics to treat IBD and pouchitis.
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.