ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2022
Effect and Mechanism of
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The dysbiosis of gut microbiota in major depressive disorder and comorbidity with overweight/obesity: unraveling biomarkers and metabolic pathways from a microbial perspective.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Rheological Properties and Sensory Profile of Yoghurt Produced with Novel Combination of Probiotic Cultures.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review and Perspectives onMicroorganisms · 2023Review
- Gut Microbiota Combined with Metabolomics Reveal the Mechanisms of Sika Deer Antler Protein on Cisplatin-Induced Hepatorenal Injury in Mice.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Alterations in the gut microbiota and the efficacy of adjuvant probiotic therapy in liver cirrhosis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Overview of anti-viral effects of probiotics via immune cells in pre-, mid- and post-SARS-CoV2 era.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effect of Methods: Specific pathogen-free (SPF) rats were selected as the healthy control group, liver injury group and B94 treatment group, with 6 rats in each group. After the model was established, the experimental animals were tested for serum liver function indicators, gut microbiota composition, metabolite composition, and histopathology. Results: The albumin/globulin ratio and serum TBA, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and indirect bilirubin levels in the B94 treatment group were significantly lower than those in the liver injury group. 16S rRNA analysis showed that the gut microbiota of the three groups of rats were significantly different. Metabolic profile analysis showed that there were significant differences in the gut metabolomes of the three groups. Haematoxylin-eosin staining of the intestinal mucosa and liver tissues showed that the degree of liver and intestinal tissue damage in the B94 treatment group was significantly lower than that in the liver injury group. Conclusion:
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.