SynthesisNarra J2025
Effective probiotic regimens for bacterial vaginosis treatment and recurrence prevention: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Narra J, 2025. 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of hormonal treatments for endometriosis on the reproductive microbiome: a systematic review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Vaginal Probiotic Potential of the Nomadic Species Limosilactobacacillus fermentum Under Dysbiotic Vaginal Conditions: Population Genomic Insights and Anti-Pathogenic Efficacy of a Vaginal Isolate VL9.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- The Gut-Vagina Axis.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Adjunctive probiotic therapy enhances metronidazole efficacy in bacterial vaginitis: a clinical trial on Iranian women.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2026Article
- HPV vaccination associates withFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Probiotics as a Preventive Strategy for Recurrent Bacterial Vaginosis: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 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
Probiotics represent a promising alternative therapy for bacterial vaginosis; however, consensus on the most effective species, strains, and doses remains lacking, and long-term safety data are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of probiotics in managing bacterial vaginosis, considering species, strain, clinical outcomes, optimal dosage, duration, and side effects. This study included randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) published in English (2014-2024) on probiotic treatment for bacterial vaginosis, assessing species, strain, dose, duration, and efficacy. A systematic search was conducted on December 20, 2024, in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed using the keywords "vaginosis," "bacterial vaginosis," and "probiotic." Data were extracted and synthesized, and study quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool, while NVivo 14 software facilitated thematic analysis. The systematic search yielded 1,560 initial records, of which 16 RCTs were included. The findings revealed that
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.