Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29201598›Full record

ReviewCurrent oral health reports2017

Use of Probiotics and Oral Health.

Robert P Allaker, Abish S Stephen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current oral health reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Topic Application of the ProbioticFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Iranian journal of microbiology · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Effectiveness ofInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Compatibility of toothpastes with probiotics for periodontal health: anFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

10 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

2 authors.

Robert P AllakerInstitute of Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Abish S StephenInstitute of Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of this study is to critically assess recent studies concerning the use of probiotics to control periodontal diseases, dental caries and halitosis (oral malodour). RECENT

findingsClinical studies have shown that probiotics when allied to conventional periodontal treatment can ameliorate microbial dysbiosis and produce significant improvement in clinical indicators of disease. However, this effect is often not maintained by the host after the end of probiotic use. Current probiotics also show limited effects in treating caries and halitosis. Novel approaches based up on replacement therapy and using highly abundant health-associated oral species, including nitrate-reducing bacteria, have been proposed to improve persistence of probiotic strains and maintain oral health benefits. SUMMARY: Probiotics have potential in the management of multifactorial diseases such as the periodontal diseases and caries, by more effectively addressing the host-microbial interface to restore homeostasis that may not be achieved with conventional treatments.

Indexed as

CariesMicrobiomeNitric oxideOral malodourPeriodontal diseasesProbiotics

Identifiers

PMID29201598
PMCPMC5688201

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.