SynthesisPloS one2018
Comparative effectiveness and safety of interventions for acute diarrhea and gastroenteritis in children: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 15 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Racecadotril in acute diarrhea in children: systematic review of double blind randomized clinical trials.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Zinc supplementation for acute and persistent watery diarrhoea in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of global health · 2024Pooled it
- Role of green banana consumption in the treatment of acute and persistent diarrhea in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, prone position and supine mechanical ventilation for severely hypoxemic acute respiratory distress syndrome: a network meta-analysis.Intensive care medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Orally Ingested Probiotic, Prebiotic, and Synbiotic Interventions as Countermeasures for Gastrointestinal Tract Infections in Nonelderly Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Pooled it
- UEG and EAES rapid guideline: Update systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on surgical management of GERD.United European gastroenterology journal · 2022Guideline
- EAES rapid guideline: updated systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on the management of common bile duct stones.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Guideline
- EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and European consensus on bariatric surgery-extension 2022.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Guideline
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis:Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- AGA Technical Review on the Role of Probiotics in the Management of Gastrointestinal Disorders.Gastroenterology · 2020Guideline
- Comparing Interventions for Management of Hot Flashes in Patients With Breast and Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analyses.Oncology nursing forum · 2020Pooled it
- Comparison of dietary macronutrient patterns of 14 popular named dietary programmes for weight and cardiovascular risk factor reduction in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2020Pooled it
- Racecadotril for acute diarrhoea in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis:Nutrients · 2019Pooled it
- Randomised feasibility study of an intestinal adsorbent in acute diarrhoea in The Gambia.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Trial
- Optimising the management of childhood acute diarrhoeal disease using a rapid test-and- treat strategy and/orBMJ global health · 2022Trial
- A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of Saccharomyces boulardii in Infants and Children With Acute Diarrhea.The Pediatric infectious disease journal · 2020Trial
- Gut microbiome dynamics in acute infectious diarrhea: A conceptual framework from acute dysbiosis toward precision restoration (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Review
- Introduction to network meta-analysis: understanding what it is, how it is done, and how it can be used for decision-making.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany interventions have shown effectiveness in reducing the duration of acute diarrhea and gastroenteritis (ADG) in children. Yet, there is lack of comparative efficacy of interventions that seem to be better than placebo among which, the clinicians must choose. Our aim was to determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of the pharmacological and nutritional interventions for reducing the duration of ADG in children.
methodsData sources included Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, and Global-Health up to May 2017. Eligible trials compared zinc (ZN), vitamin A, micronutrients (MN), probiotics, prebiotics, symbiotics, racecadotril, smectite(SM), loperamide, diluted milk, lactose-free formula(LCF), or their combinations, to placebo or standard treatment (STND), or among them. Two reviewers independently performed screening, review, study selection and extraction. The primary outcome was diarrhea duration. Secondary outcomes were stool frequency at day 2, diarrhea at day 3, vomiting and side effects. We performed a random effects Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine the direct and indirect evidence for each outcome. Mean differences and odds ratio with their credible intervals(CrI) were calculated. Coherence and transitivity assumptions were assessed. Meta-regression, subgroups and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of effect modifiers. Summary under the cumulative curve (SUCRA) values with their CrI were calculated. We assessed the evidence quality and classified the best interventions using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development & Evaluation (GRADE) approach for each paired comparison.
resultsA total of 174 studies (32,430 children) proved eligible. Studies were conducted in 42 countries of which most were low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). Interventions were grouped in 27 categories. Most interventions were better than STND. Reduction of diarrhea varied from 12.5 to 51.1 hours. The combinations Saccharomyces boulardii (SB)+ZN, and SM+ZN were considered the best interventions (i.e., GRADE quality of evidence: moderate to high, substantial superiority to STND, reduction in duration of 35 to 40 hours, and large SUCRA values), while symbiotics (combination of probiotics+prebiotics), ZN, loperamide and combinations ZN+MN and ZN+LCF were considered inferior to the best and better than STND [Quality: moderate to high, superior to STND, and reduction of 17 to 25 hours]. In subgroups analyses, effect of ZN was higher in LMIC and was not present in high-income countries (HIC). Vitamin A, MN, prebiotics, kaolin-pectin, and diluted milk were similar to STND [Quality: moderate to high]. The remainder of the interventions had low to very-low evidence quality. Loperamide was the only intervention with more side effects than STND [Quality: moderate]. DISCUSSION/
conclusionMost interventions analyzed (except vitamin A, micronutrients, prebiotics, and kaolin-pectin) showed evidence of superiority to placebo in reducing the diarrhea. With moderate-to high-quality of evidence, SB+ZN and SM+ZN, demonstrated the best combination of evidence quality and magnitude of effect while symbiotics, loperamide and zinc proved being the best single interventions, and loperamide was the most unsafe. Nonetheless, the effect of zinc, SB+ZN and SM+ZN might only be applied to children in LMIC. Results suggest no further role for studies comparing interventions against no treatment or placebo, or studies testing loperamide, MN, kaolin-pectin, vitamin A, prebiotics and diluted milk. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42015023778.
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.