Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38979537›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2024

Probiotics for oral health: a critical evaluation of bacterial strains.

Rachelle E Beattie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Assessing the Impact ofNutrients · 2026
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Newly EmergingMicroorganisms · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Frontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Journal of oral microbiology · 2026
    Review
  20. 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

1 author.

Rachelle E BeattieProBiora Health, LLC, Sarasota, FL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral health is critical for total body health and well-being; however, little improvement in oral health status has occurred in the U.S. over the past 20 years. Tooth decay and gum disease remain highly prevalent, with more than 90% and 50% of adults suffering from these conditions, respectively. To combat this lack of improvement, alternative approaches to dental care are now being suggested. One such alternative therapy is probiotics for oral care. In the oral cavity, probiotic strains have been shown to reduce levels of oral pathogens, inhibit the formation of dental caries, and reduce the levels of bacteria that cause halitosis. However, as the oral care probiotic market expands, many products contain bacterial species and strains with no documented health benefits leading to confusion and mistrust among consumers and clinicians. This confusion is enhanced by the regulatory status of probiotic products which puts the onus of safety and efficacy on the manufacturer rather than a central regulatory body. The overarching goal of this review is to provide consumers and clinicians with documented evidence supporting (or refuting) the health benefits of oral care probiotics marketed for sale in the United States. This includes defining what constitutes an oral care probiotic product and a strain level analysis of candidate probiotics from the genera

Indexed as

dentistryLactobacillusoral careprebioticprobioticStreptococcus

Identifiers

PMID38979537
PMCPMC11228166

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.