SynthesisMidwifery2022
Probiotic interventions to reduce antepartum Group B streptococcus colonization: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Midwifery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research focus and emerging trends of the gut microbiome and infant: a bibliometric analysis from 2004 to 2024.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Pooled it
- Supplementation of Probiotics in Pregnant Women Targeting Group B Streptococcus Colonization: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- Time to rethink prevention of neonatal group B streptococcal disease.Seminars in immunopathology · 2026Review
- The Effect of Oral Supplementation with a Multi-Strain Probiotic Preparation on Group B Streptococcus (GBS) Carriage in Pregnant Women-A Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative Characterization of Vaginal and Gut Microbiota in Late-Pregnancy Women with or Without Group B Streptococcus Colonization.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Modulation of group BInfection and immunity · 2025Article
- The Safety of Probiotics Intended for Use in Pregnant and Lactating Women: From a Desirable to a Required Task.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Re-framing the importance of Group BInfection and immunity · 2024Review
- Harnessing the power within: engineering the microbiome for enhanced gynecologic health.Reproduction & fertility · 2024Review
- Vaginal and Rectal microbiome changes following administration of a multi-species antenatal probiotic: A randomized control trial.Gut microbes reports · 2024Article
- Early-onset group B streptococcal disease in African countries and maternal vaccination strategies.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Maternal Intake of Probiotics to Program Offspring Health.Current nutrition reports · 2022Review
- Article
- Neonatal intestinal colonization ofGut microbesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review and meta-analyse studies of the efficacy of probiotics to reduce antenatal Group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonisation.
participantsAntenatal participants with known positive GBS colonisation or unknown GBS status.
interventionProbiotic interventions containing species of Lactobacillus or Streptococcus.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND
findingsThe systematic review included 10 studies. Five articles contained in vitro studies of probiotic interventions to determine antagonistic activity against GBS. Six clinical trials of probiotics to reduce antenatal GBS were systematically reviewed and meta-analysed. The meta-analysis revealed that the use of an antenatal probiotic decreased the probability of a positive GBS result by 44% (OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 8.7%, 194.1%, p = 0.02) (n = 709). However, only one clinical trial of 10 had a low risk of bias. KEY
conclusionsThe probiotic interventions subjected to in vitro testing showed antagonistic activity against GBS through the mechanisms of acidification, immune modulation, and adhesion. The findings of the meta-analysis of the clinical trials revealed that probiotics are a moderately effective intervention to reduce antenatal GBS colonisation. More well-controlled trials with diverse participants and with better elucidation of variables influencing GBS colonisation rates are needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Probiotic interventions appear to be a safe and effective primary prevention strategy for antenatal GBS colonisation. Application of this low-risk intervention needs more study but may reduce the need for intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis in countries or regions where antenatal GBS screening is used. Midwives can be instrumental in conducting and supporting larger well-controlled clinical trials.
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.