Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33973898›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of gastroenterology2021

Probiotics: To Use or Not to Use? That Is the Question.

Max Schmulson

Abstract readEditorialComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Max SchmulsonLaboratory of Liver, Pancreas, and Motility (HIPAM), Unit of Research in Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine-Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractThis Editorial analyzes the paper by Schnadower et al on the secondary analysis of 2 randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, and a combination of L. rhamnosus R0011 and L. helveticus R0052, showing that moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis symptoms as primary endpoint, did not differ between probiotics or placebo. The data is important because probiotics are commonly used and prescribed in clinical practice, many times without strong evidence and producing a high economic burden. Two other examples are addressed. A systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trial of L. reuteri DSM 17938 finding that this probiotic reduced the duration of diarrhea and hospitalization, to discuss the issue that the effect of probiotics is strain specific. In addition, the different findings of reviews and meta-analyses of probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome in which a common conclusion of all of them was that adequately powered randomized controlled trials are required to better determine the species, strains and doses of probiotics, as well as the treatment duration that is most efficacious. Finally, the fact that probiotics are frequently prescribed despite lacking regulations by pharmaceutical authorities is addressed.

Indexed as

GastroenteritisLacticaseibacillus rhamnosusProbioticsDiarrheaHospitalizationHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.