Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37432320›Full record

ReviewNutrients2023

Metehan Ozen, Hugues Piloquet, Monika Schaubeck

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. ISME communications · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Protective Effect ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Enhancing the antibacterial ability ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Frontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  16. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Metehan OzenSchool of Medicine, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University, 34752 Istanbul, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-4088-3103
Hugues PiloquetDepartment of Paediatric Chronic Diseases, Nantes University Hospital, 44000 Nantes, France.
Monika SchaubeckHiPP GmbH & Co. Vertrieb KG, 85276 Pfaffenhofen, Germany.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRKent Hastanesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breastfeeding provides the ideal nutrition for infants. Human milk contains a plethora of functional ingredients which foster the development of the immune system. The human milk microbiota predominantly contributes to this protective effect. This is mediated by various mechanisms, such as an antimicrobial effect, pathogen exclusion and barrier integrity, beneficial effects on the gastrointestinal microbiota, vitamin synthesis, immunity enhancement, secreted probiotic factors, and postbiotic mechanisms. Therefore, human milk is a good source for isolating probiotics for infants who cannot be exclusively breastfed. One such probiotic which was isolated from human milk is

Indexed as

Limosilactobacillus fermentumProbioticsAnimalsBiological TransportBreast FeedingFemaleHumansInfantMilk, Humandiarrhoeahuman milkinfant formulainfant microbiotaLactobacillus fermentum CECT5716Limosilactobacillus fermentum CECT5716probioticrespiratory tract infections

Identifiers

PMID37432320
PMCPMC10181152
OpenAlexW4375863455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.