ReviewMicroorganisms2025
Effects of Postbiotic Administration on Canine Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Microorganisms, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
- Effects of Complementary Feed with Postbiotics Derived fromAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Emerging Trends in Pet Food: Scientific Innovations, Patent Landscapes, and Global Market Development.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Functional Effects ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Beneficial effects of a prebiotic-postbiotic supplement on digestive health and fecal microbiota in dogs and cats.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Effects of aAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Postbiotics-defined in 2021 by the International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) as preparations of inactivated microorganisms and/or their components that confer health benefits to the host-are a promising tool in veterinary medicine. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated their types, mechanisms of action, and physiological effects in dogs. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to 10 October 2024. Eligible studies included peer-reviewed trials in dogs or mechanistic studies on postbiotics; studies in other species or without peer review were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed, and random-effects meta-analyses were performed when appropriate. Of 157 records, 69 met the inclusion criteria, including 13 in vivo studies in dogs. Meta-analyses of selected outcomes showed no statistically significant differences between postbiotic and control groups. Evidence is limited by small sample sizes, strain heterogeneity, and varied study designs. Despite nonsignificant results, existing evidence from other species suggests that postbiotics improve the gut microbiota composition, modulate immune and inflammatory responses, reduce oxidative stress, and aid in the treatment of chronic conditions such as atopic dermatitis. Taken together with their potential role as an alternative to antimicrobial use, these findings highlight the need for further research in canine health to support the use of postbiotics in the treatment of common canine diseases, either as a standalone therapy or in combination with existing therapeutic options.
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.