Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29249065›Full record

ReviewProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2018

Methods to Assess the Antioxidative Properties of Probiotics.

P V Zolotukhin, E V Prazdnova, V A Chistyakov

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Probiotic properties ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Genomic insights into the probiotic potential ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. PreliminaryIranian journal of veterinary research · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors.

P V ZolotukhinSouthern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia.
E V PrazdnovaSouthern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia. prazdnova@sfedu.ru.
V A ChistyakovSouthern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia.

Funding

Russian Science Foundation 16-16-04032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics prove useful in correcting and preventing numerous health conditions, including those having severe impact on society, e.g., obesity and cancer. Notably, these capabilities of probiotics appear to be associated with their antioxidant properties. The mechanisms of antioxidant action of probiotics range from immediate biochemical scavenging of reactive substances to induction of signaling events leading to increased capacity of the host's cytoprotective systems. Since the antioxidant effects of probiotics significantly vary in types and details, a broad selection of methods of assessment of these properties is required in order to identify, characterize, and develop novel probiotics for medical purposes, as well as to explain the mechanisms of action of probiotics already in use in healthcare. This review revises the versatile toolbox, which can be used to assess the antioxidant properties of probiotics.

Indexed as

AntioxidantsBacteriaChemistry Techniques, AnalyticalProbioticsAntioxidantsAntioxidant assaysBiochemical scavengingPreventive healthcareProbioticsSignaling

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.