Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41023690›Full record

SynthesisNutrition journal2025

Effects of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics on gut microbiota in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Kai Zhuang, Huanhuan Luo, Muhuang Zeng, Sze Chun Leo Chan, Meiting Gong, Yunhan Wang

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Application and Challenges of Using ProbioticDiseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Kai ZhuangState Key Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndrome, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510006, China.
Huanhuan LuoState Key Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndrome, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510006, China.
Muhuang ZengShantou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shantou, China.
Sze Chun Leo ChanDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, and Immunology Translational Research Programme, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Meiting GongDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, and Immunology Translational Research Programme, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Yunhan WangSchool of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510006, Guangdong, China. wangyunhan@gzucm.edu.cn.

Funding

the National Natural Science Foundation of China 82174244
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a lack of evidence on microbial compositions and associated metabolic changes in probiotics, prebiotics, or synbiotics (PPS) in older adults.

objectiveThis meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of PPS on gut microbiota composition, short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), and inflammatory markers in older adults.

methodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to May 2025. RCTs were included if they examined microbiome-related outcomes in individuals aged ≥ 60 years following PPS interventions. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was adopted for Quality appraisal. Meta-analysis was performed in RevMan 5.3, with standardized mean difference (SMD) as effect measures.

results29 RCTs were included, involving 1,633 participants. PPS supplementation notably increased Bifidobacterium abundance (prebiotics: SMD = 1.09; probiotics: SMD = 0.40), whereas synbiotics showed no overall effect but enhanced the abundance of specific strains (B. angulatum, B. longum, B. breve). Probiotic supplementation enhanced microbial diversity (Shannon index: SMD = 0.76), while synbiotics increased Lactobacillus casei abundance (SMD = 0.75) and reduced Pseudomonas levels (SMD = -0.55). For inflammatory markers, prebiotics increased IL-10 levels (SMD = 0.61) and reduced IL-1β (SMD = -0.39), whereas synbiotics reduced TNF-α (SMD = -0.36). Synbiotic supplementation enhanced valeric acid (SMD = 0.50) and acetic acid levels (SMD = 0.62).

conclusionPPS interventions demonstrated potential benefits for older adults by increasing beneficial bacteria such as Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus casei, reducing harmful genera like Pseudomonas, improving anti-inflammatory responses, and enhancing the production of SCFAs.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomePrebioticsProbioticsSynbioticsAgedFatty Acids, VolatileHumansMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicFatty Acids, VolatilePrebioticsGut microbiotaMeta-analysisOlder adultsPrebioticsProbioticsRCTSynbiotics

Identifiers

PMID41023690
PMCPMC12482033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.