Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33072084›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2020

Probiotics in Medicine: A Long Debate.

Elisavet Stavropoulou, Eugenia Bezirtzoglou

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 152 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
152citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
12.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

152 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 264 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. EngineeredAnimal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2026
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

92 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 2 countries.

Elisavet StavropoulouCHUV (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Eugenia BezirtzoglouLaboratory of Hygiene and Environmental Protection, Department of Medicine, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece.
Democritus University of Thrace · GRHôpital du Valais · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last years probiotics gained the attention of clinicians for their use in the prevention and treatment of multiple diseases. Probiotics main mechanisms of action include enhanced mucosal barrier function, direct antagonism with pathogens, inhibition of bacterial adherence and invasion capacity in the intestinal epithelium, boosting of the immune system and regulation of the central nervous system. It is accepted that there is a mutual communication between the gut microbiota and the liver, the so-called "microbiota-gut-liver axis" as well as a reciprocal communication between the intestinal microbiota and the central nervous system through the "microbiota-gut-brain axis." Moreover, recently the "gut-lung axis" in bacterial and viral infections is considerably discussed for bacterial and viral infections, as the intestinal microbiota amplifies the alveolar macrophage activity having a protective role in the host defense against pneumonia. The importance of the normal human intestinal microbiota is recognized in the preservation of health. Disease states such as, infections, autoimmune conditions, allergy and other may occur when the intestinal balance is disturbed. Probiotics seem to be a promising approach to prevent and even reduce the symptoms of such clinical states as an adjuvant therapy by preserving the balance of the normal intestinal microbiota and improving the immune system. The present review states globally all different disorders in which probiotics can be given. To date, Stronger data in favor of their clinical use are provided in the prevention of gastrointestinal disorders, antibiotic-associated diarrhea, allergy and respiratory infections. We hereby discuss the role of probiotics in the reduction of the respiratory infection symptoms and we focus on the possibility to use them as an adjuvant to the therapeutic approach of the pandemic COVID-19. Nevertheless, it is accepted by the scientific community that more clinical studies should be undertaken in large samples of diseased populations so that the assessment of their therapeutic potential provide us with strong evidence for their efficacy and safety in clinical use.

Indexed as

Coronavirus InfectionsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralBacteriaBacterial AdhesionBetacoronavirusBrainCOVID-19Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansIntestinal MucosaProbioticsSARS-CoV-2allergyBifidobacteriumCOVID-19intestineLactobacilluslungmedicineprobiotics

Identifiers

PMID33072084
PMCPMC7544950
OpenAlexW3088143070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.