ArticlePloS one2020
Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated adverse events in children-A scoping review to inform development of a core outcome set.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06283784 (Double Blind, Randomized, Placebo Controlled Study To Evaluate The Efficacy of a Proprietary Mix of Live Probiotics in the Prophylaxis Of Diarrhea In Adult Patients Who Already Initiated An Oral Antibiotic Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Double Blind, Randomized, Placebo Controlled Study To Evaluate The Efficacy of a Proprietary Mix of Live Probiotics in the Prophylaxis Of Diarrhea In Adult Patients Who Already Initiated An Oral Antibiotic Therapy
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Probiotic Human Study Design and Reporting (PRODARE): Recommendations to Improve Research Practice.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- Use of Probiotics During Antibiotic Therapy in Pediatrics: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Italian Primary Care Pediatricians.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Development of a patient/proxy-reported instrument for pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea.PloS one · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRoutine use of probiotics during antibiotic therapy in children remains a subject of discussion. To facilitate synthesis of individual study results and guideline formulation, it is important to assess predefined, similar, and clinically important outcomes. Core outcome sets are a proposed solution for this issue. The aim of this review was to document choice, design, and heterogeneity of outcomes in studies that assessed the effects of probiotics used for the prevention of antibiotic-associated adverse events in children.
methodsA scoping literature search covering three major databases was performed. Studies that evaluated oral probiotics' use concomitant with antibiotic therapy in children were included. Data on outcome definitions, measurement instruments, and follow-up were extracted. The outcomes were assigned to predefined core areas and domains. Data were analyzed descriptively.
resultsThirty-seven studies were included in this review. Diarrhea, the most commonly reported outcome, had diagnostic criteria clearly defined only in 21 studies. In total, 16 different definitions of diarrhea were identified. Diarrhea duration, severity, and etiology were reported in 9, 4, and 7 studies, respectively. Twenty studies assessed gastrointestinal symptoms other than diarrhea. Seven studies reported outcomes related to resource use or the economic impact of the intervention. Only 2 studies assessed outcomes related to life impact. None of the studies predefined adverse events of probiotic use.
conclusionsIdentified outcomes were characterized by substantial heterogeneity. The majority of outcomes were not designed to evaluate endpoints of real-life relevance. Results from this review suggest the need for a new core outcome set consisting of outcomes important for decision-making.
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.