ArticleSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina
What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about probiotics as preventive interventions?
Article in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vulvovaginal yeast infections during pregnancy and perinatal outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2023Pooled it
- New Drugs on the Block: Dietary Management and Nutritional Considerations During the Use of Anti-Obesity Medication.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Probiotics and the intestinal tight junction barrier function.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Efficacy and safety of lurasidone for schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta‑analysis of eight short‑term, randomized, double‑blind, placebo‑controlled clinical trials.Biomedical reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Role ofCurrent developments in nutrition · 2023Review
- Εfficacy and safety of vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) in the treatment of adult patients with major depressive disorder: A systematic review and a meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
- Probiotics in Critically Ill Patients: An Umbrella Review.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022Article
- Invasive Infections Associated with the Use of Probiotics in Children: A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Probiotics and prebiotics potential for the care of skin, female urogenital tract, and respiratory tract.Folia microbiologica · 2020Review
- Probiotics, Nutrition, and the Small Intestine.Current gastroenterology reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProbiotics have been used for a range of clinical situations and their use is strongly encouraged by the media worldwide. This study identified and summarized all Cochrane systematic reviews about the preventive effects of probiotics in clinical practice. DESIGN AND
settingReview of systematic reviews, conducted in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp).
methodsWe included all Cochrane reviews on any probiotics when they were used as preventive interventions and compared with no intervention, placebo or any other pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention.
results17 Cochrane systematic reviews fulfilled our inclusion criteria and were summarized in this report. None of the reviews included in the present study provided high-quality evidence for any outcome. The benefits from use of probiotics included decreased incidence of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea; decreased incidence of upper respiratory tract infections and duration of episodes; decreased need for antibiotics and absences from school due to colds; and decreased incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Probiotics seem to decrease the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus, birthweight, risk of vaginal infection and incidence of eczema.
conclusionDespite the marketing and the benefits associated with probiotics, there is little scientific evidence supporting the use of probiotics. None of the reviews provided any high-quality evidence for prevention of illnesses through use of probiotics. More trials are needed to gain better knowledge of probiotics and to confirm when their use is beneficial and cost-effective.
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.