SynthesisInternational dental journal2024
Efficacy of Probiotic Consumption on Oral Outcomes in Children and/or Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in International dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Applications of Probiotics in Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics-A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of Probiotic Short-Term Regiment on Oral Health Parameters in Children: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Nutrients · 2025Trial
- Altered Salivary Microbiome and Increased Immune Markers in Mouth-Breathing Children: Implications for Oral Health.International dental journal · 2026Article
- The effects of probiotics intervention on oral health outcomes: a comprehensive umbrella review of meta-analyses.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- The butterfly effect: collateral damage and impacts of antimicrobial strategies on the oral microbiome.npj antimicrobials and resistance · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We assessed the impact of probiotics on outcomes related to caries in children and/or adolescents without underlying systemic diseases. We performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Searches were performed in Embase, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science until March 2023 for RCTs assessing probiotics with a minimum intake duration of 0.2 months vs. control (no treatment or placebo) and reporting at least one primary or secondary outcome. Primary outcomes were number of carious, Streptococcus mutans count, and Lactobacillus count; secondary outcomes were bacterial plaque index, gingival index, salivary pH, and bleeding index. We performed meta-analyses with random effects models and the inverse variance method. Effects were described as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). The risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2.0 tool. The GRADE methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence (QoE). Nineteen RCTs were included (n = 2622), with a follow-up range of 0.2 to 108 months. Probiotics had no effect on reduction of dental caries (MD -0.24 carious pieces, 95%CI -0.72 to 0.23; I2 = 52%, low QoE) or Lactobacillus count (MD -0.78 CFU/mL, 95%CI -1.65 to 0.09; I2= 52%, very low QoE) vs. control. However, probiotics probably reduced S. mutans count vs. control (MD -0.40 CFU/mL, 95%CI -0.57 to -0.24; I2 = 11%, moderate QoE). Probiotics had no effect on bacterial plaque index (MD 0.21 units of bacterial plaque, 95%CI -0. 55-0.96; I2 = 80%, very low QoE), gingival index (MD 0.04 units of gingival index, 95%CI -0.18 to 0.27; I2= 0%, low QoE), and salivary pH (MD -0.12 pH units, 95%CI -0.72 to 0.48; I2 = 92%, very low QoE) vs. control. Probiotics were found to likely reduce S. mutans counts. However, no significant effect of probiotics was observed in reducing other outcomes compared to the control group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.