Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36539062›Full record

ArticleJournal of sport and health science2024

A systematic scoping review of study methodology for randomized controlled trials investigating probiotics in athletic and physically active populations.

Alex E Mohr, David B Pyne, Geovana Silva Fogaça Leite, Deborah Akins, Jamie Pugh

Open access · diamondAbstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of sport and health science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Impact of probioticiScience · 2024
    Article
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 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Alex E MohrCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA. Electronic address: aemohr@asu.edu.
David B PyneResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.
Geovana Silva Fogaça LeiteLaboratory of Functional Fermented Food, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-030, Brazil.
Deborah AkinsCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
Jamie PughResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.
Arizona State University · USLiverpool John Moores University · GBUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of Canberra · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purported ergogenic and health effects of probiotics have been a topic of great intrigue among researchers, practitioners, and the lay public alike. There has also been an increased research focus within the realm of sports science and exercise medicine on the athletic gut microbiota. However, compared to other ergogenic aids and dietary supplements, probiotics present unique study challenges. The objectives of this systematic scoping review were to identify and characterize study methodologies of randomized controlled trials investigating supplementation with probiotics in athletes and physically active individuals.

methodsFour databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were searched for randomized controlled studies involving healthy athletes or physically active individuals. An intervention with probiotics and inclusion of a control and/or placebo group were essential. Only peer-reviewed articles in English were considered, and there were no date restrictions. Results were extracted and presented in tabular form to detail study protocols, characteristics, and outcomes. Bias in randomized controlled trials was determined with the RoB 2.0 tool.

resultsA total of 45 studies were included in the review, with 35 using a parallel group design and 10 using a cross-over design. Approximately half the studies used a single probiotic and the other half a multi-strain preparation. The probiotic dose ranged from 2 × 10

conclusionThere is a substantial body of research on the effects of probiotic supplementation in healthy athletes and physically active individuals. Considerable heterogeneity in probiotic selection and dosage as well as outcome measures has made clinical and mechanistic interpretation challenging for both health care practitioners and researchers. Attention to issues of randomization of participants, treatments and interventions, selection of outcomes, demographics, and reporting of adverse events will facilitate more trustworthy interpretation of probiotic study results and inform evidence-based guidelines.

Indexed as

ProbioticsSportsDietary SupplementsFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicExerciseExperimental methodologyGastrointestinal symptomsGut microbiotaProbiotic supplementation

Identifiers

PMID36539062
PMCPMC10818115
OpenAlexW4313379940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.