Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33223831›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2020

Randomized Clinical Trial Examining the Impact of

Victoria Sanborn, M Andrea Azcarate-Peril, John Updegraff, Lisa Manderino, John Gunstad

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Victoria SanbornDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA.
M Andrea Azcarate-PerilDepartment of Cell Biology and Physiology and Microbiome Core Facility, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0325-1289
John UpdegraffDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA.
Lisa ManderinoDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA.
John GunstadDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA.
Kent State University · USUniversity of North Carolina Health Care · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe gut microbiome has been linked to cognitive function and appears to worsen with aging. Probiotic supplementation has been found to improve the health of the gut microbiome. As such, it is possible that probiotic supplementation may protect the aging brain. The current study examined the cognitive benefits of probiotic supplementation ( MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Two hundred community-dwelling adults aged 52-75 were enrolled (mean age=64.3, SD=5.52). A three-month intervention involved daily consumption of probiotic or placebo. Independent sample

resultsA total of 145 participants were examined in primary analyses (probiotic=77, placebo=68) and excluded persons due to discontinuation, low adherence, missing data, or outlier values. Established criteria (ie ≥1 subtest t-scores ≤35; n=19, n=23) were used to operationally define cognitive impairment. Repeated measures ANOVAs revealed that persons with cognitive impairment who consumed probiotics exhibited a greater total cognition score improvement than persons with cognitive impairment in the placebo group and cognitively intact persons in probiotic or placebo groups.

conclusion

Indexed as

cognitive agingdementiagastrointestinal microbiomemicrobiotaprobiotics

Identifiers

PMID33223831
PMCPMC7671471
OpenAlexW3100071251

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.