Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31313372›Full record

SynthesisJournal of veterinary internal medicine2019

Clinical effect of probiotics in prevention or treatment of gastrointestinal disease in dogs: A systematic review.

Anders P Jensen, Charlotte R Bjørnvad

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A new highly digestible prescription diet containingFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Effects ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. The alleviating effects and mechanisms ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Updating the Classification of Chronic Inflammatory Enteropathies in Dogs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anders P JensenAniCura Copenhagen Animal Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charlotte R BjørnvadDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2876-1667
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGastrointestinal diseases are prevalent in dogs, and probiotics could provide safe alternatives to conventional treatments.

objectiveTo evaluate the clinical effects of probiotics when used in the prevention or treatment of gastrointestinal disease in dogs compared with no treatment, only symptomatic treatment, or conventional treatment.

methodsA systematic review was preformed searching AGRICOLA, AGRIS, CAB Abstracts, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and Web of Science to identify articles published before April 1, 2017. Selection criteria were original research report, those published in peer reviewed journal, and study investigating in vivo use of probiotic for prevention or treatment of gastrointestinal disease in dogs. Studies were rated based on the level of evidence, and methodological quality was evaluated by the following variables: similarities between groups at baseline, risk of bias, and study group size.

resultsOne hundred sixty-five studies were identified, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria-12 concerned acute gastrointestinal disease and 5 concerned chronic gastrointestinal disease. The level of evidence ranged between randomized controlled studies and crossover uncontrolled trials; estimated risk of bias was generally moderate to high; and sample sizes were small. Feces consistency was the most frequently evaluated clinical variable. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The current data point toward a very limited and possibly clinically unimportant effect for prevention or treatment of acute gastrointestinal disease. For chronic gastrointestinal disease, dietary intervention remains the major key in treatment, whereas probiotic supplement seems not to add significant improvement. However, studies were often underpowered, underscoring the need for future larger, preferably multicenter studies.

Indexed as

ProbioticsAnimalsDiarrheaDog DiseasesDogsGastrointestinal Diseasesacute diarrheachronic diarrheastress diarrheasynbiotic

Identifiers

PMID31313372
PMCPMC6766488
OpenAlexW2957902360

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.