Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28186660›Full record

Trial reportJournal of veterinary internal medicine2017

Efficacy of a Probiotic-Prebiotic Supplement on Incidence of Diarrhea in a Dog Shelter: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

L Rose, J Rose, S Gosling, M Holmes

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Engineering the microbiome for animal health and conservation.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2019
    Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

L RoseProbiotics International Ltd, Lopen Head, Somerset, UK.
J RoseSchool of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
S GoslingWood Green The Animals Charity, Godmanchester, UK.
M HolmesDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Universtity of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiarrhea is the most frequent morbidity affecting kenneled dogs in animal shelters. Diarrhea impacts animal welfare and the finances of the shelter as they must treat, clean, and house affected animals until recovered. HYPOTHESIS/

objectivesSupplementing dogs entering an animal shelter with a probiotic-prebiotic, known as a synbiotic, will decrease the incidence of diarrhea. ANIMALS: Seven hundred and seventy-three dogs entering an animal shelter in the United Kingdom.

methodsA prospective double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

resultsStatistical difference was found between the groups across 3 measures of diarrhea incidence. First, the mean percentage of scored days per dog that were scored as diarrhea throughout their stay was 2.0% in the synbiotic group and 3.2% in the placebo group (P = .0022). Second, the occurrence of diarrhea within the first 14 days' stay was 18.8% in the synbiotic product group and 27.2% in the placebo group (P = .0008). Third, the occurrence of ≥2 consecutive days of diarrhea within the first 14 days' stay was 4.6% in the synbiotic product group and 8.0% in the placebo group (P = .0300). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Supplementing healthy dogs entering an animal shelter with a synbiotic supplement significantly decreased the incidence of diarrhea in this trial. Animal shelters can use synbiotic supplements to improve animal welfare and decrease costs involved in cleaning and housing animals as well as potentially decreasing veterinary intervention.

Indexed as

AnimalsDiarrheaDog DiseasesDogsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleIncidenceMaleProspective StudiesSynbioticsUnited KingdomCanineDiarrhea and vomitingEnterococcus faeciumGastroenterologyGastrointestinalNutrition

Identifiers

PMID28186660
PMCPMC5354029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.