Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37492598›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2023

Effects of isolation and confinement on gastrointestinal microbiota-a systematic review.

Bea Klos, Christina Steinbach, Jasmin Ketel, Claude Lambert, John Penders, Joël Doré, Paul Enck, Isabelle Mack

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Bea KlosDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Christina SteinbachDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Jasmin KetelDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Claude LambertCIRI-Immunology Lab University Hospital, Saint-Étienne, France.
John PendersDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Infectious Diseases and Infection Prevention, Maastricht University Medical Center, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Joël DoréUMR Micalis Institut, INRA, Paris-Saclay University, Jouy-En-Josas, France.
Paul EnckDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Isabelle MackDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The gastrointestinal (GI) microbiota is a complex and dynamic ecosystem whose composition and function are influenced by many internal and external factors. Overall, the individual GI microbiota composition appears to be rather stable but can be influenced by extreme shifts in environmental exposures. To date, there is no systematic literature review that examines the effects of extreme environmental conditions, such as strict isolation and confinement, on the GI microbiota. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to examine the effects of isolated and confined environments on the human GI microbiota. The literature search was conducted according to PRISMA criteria using PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. Relevant studies were identified based on exposure to isolated and confined environments, generally being also antigen-limited, for a minimum of 28 days and classified according to the microbiota analysis method (cultivation- or molecular based approaches) and the isolation habitat (space, space- or microgravity simulation such as MARS-500 or natural isolation such as Antarctica). Microbial shifts in abundance, alpha diversity and community structure in response to isolation were assessed. Results: Regardless of the study habitat, inconsistent shifts in abundance of 40 different genera, mainly in the phylum Bacillota (formerly Firmicutes) were reported. Overall, the heterogeneity of studies was high. Reducing heterogeneity was neither possible by differentiating the microbiota analysis methods nor by subgrouping according to the isolation habitat. Alpha diversity evolved non-specifically, whereas the microbial community structure remained dissimilar despite partial convergence. The GI ecosystem returned to baseline levels following exposure, showing resilience irrespective of the experiment length. Conclusion: An isolated and confined environment has a considerable impact on the GI microbiota composition in terms of diversity and relative abundances of dominant taxa. However, due to a limited number of studies with rather small sample sizes, it is important to approach an in-depth conclusion with caution, and results should be considered as a preliminary trend. The risk of dysbiosis and associated diseases should be considered when planning future projects in extreme environments. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022357589.

Indexed as

Antarcticaconfinementgastrointestinalguthumanisolationmicrobiotaspace

Identifiers

PMID37492598
PMCPMC10364611

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.