Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38182678›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2024

Nanocarrier-mediated probiotic delivery: a systematic meta-analysis assessing the biological effects.

Ramendra Pati Pandey, Gunjan, Himanshu, Riya Mukherjee, Chung-Ming Chang

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
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.

Ramendra Pati Pandey *School of Health Sciences and Technology (SOHST), UPES, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, 248007, India.
Gunjan *Graduate Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Road, Guishan District, Taoyuan City, 33302, Taiwan (R.O.C.).
HimanshuGraduate Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Road, Guishan District, Taoyuan City, 33302, Taiwan (R.O.C.).
Riya MukherjeeGraduate Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Road, Guishan District, Taoyuan City, 33302, Taiwan (R.O.C.).
Chung-Ming ChangMaster & Ph.D Program in Biotechnology Industry, Chang Gung University, No. 259, Wenhua 1st Road, Guishan District, Taoyuan City, 33302, Taiwan (R.O.C.). cmchang@mail.cgu.edu.tw.

Funding

Chang Gung University (SCRPD1L0221); DOXABIO-CGU, R.O.C., (SCRPD1K0131), and the CGU project grant (UZRPD1L0011).
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics have gained a significant attention as a promising way to improve gut health and overall well-being. The increasing recognition of the potential health advantages associated with functional food products, leading to a specific emphasis on co-encapsulating probiotic bacteria and bioactive compounds within a unified matrix. To further explore this concept, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the effects of probiotics encapsulated in nanoparticles. A comprehensive meta-analysis was conducted, encompassing 10 papers published from 2017 to 2022, focusing on the encapsulation of probiotics within nanoparticles and their viability in various gastrointestinal conditions. The selection of these papers was based on their direct relevance to the research topic. Random-effect models were used to aggregate study-specific risk estimates. In the majority of studies, it was observed that nano-encapsulated nanoparticles showed improved viability over time compared to their free state counterparts. At various time intervals, the odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using fixed and random effect models. At 0 min, the OR (95%CI) was 2.79 (2.79; 2.80) and 2.38 (2.14; 2.64) for. At 30 and 60 min observation was at similar rate of 2.23 (2.23; 2.24) and 2.05 (1.73; 2.43). However, at 90 min it was 1.39 (1.39; 1.39) and 1.66 (1.29; 2.14) and at 120 min 2.41 (2.41; 2.42) and 2.03 (1.63; 2.52). Overall evaluation of encapsulation revealed an improvement in probiotic bacterial viability in simulated the gastrointestinal environments.

Indexed as

NanoparticlesProbioticsFunctional FoodMicrobial ViabilityOdds Ratio

Identifiers

PMID38182678
PMCPMC10770044

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.