SynthesisBMC oral health2025
Causal effects of gut microbiota on periodontitis risk: a meta-analysis of Mendelian randomization studies.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microbial Shifts After Sleeve Gastrectomy: The Gut-Oral Axis, Periodontal Outcomes, and Competing Oral Risks.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- The Effects of Periodontal Treatment on Psoriasis: A Systematic Review of Limited Clinical and Preclinical Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- Periodontitis and cardiovascular diseases: bridging the gap through mitochondrial dysfunction.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Investigating the causal impact of gut microbiota on periodontitis based on Mendelian randomization, bulk transcriptomics, and single-cell transcriptomics.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- The Impact of Oral Health on the Number of Missing Matches and Physical Performance in Elite Male Soccer Players.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Oral health status, on-ice and off-ice test performance, and match performance in elite male ice hockey players: a pilot study.Frontiers in oral health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the causal relationship between gut microbiota and periodontitis (PD) by synthesizing Mendelian randomization (MR) studies across taxonomic levels.
methodsWe systematically searched five databases to November 2024 for MR studies linking gut microbiota (Order/Family/Genus/Species) to PD. Study-level odds ratios (ORs) were pooled with random-effects models; small-study effects were explored; and multiplicity was controlled with Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR)-within each taxonomic level (primary) and globally across all taxa (sensitivity). Reporting and certainty were appraised using STROBE-MR and a GRADE framework adapted for MR. Meta-analyses used Stata 15.1.
resultsSix MR studies were included. Enterobacterales (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.17-1.44) and Pasteurellales (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.04-1.21) remained significant after within-level FDR. At the genus/species levels, Granulicatella and Prevotella salivae were risk-increasing, whereas Butyricicoccus and Ruminiclostridium 6 were protective (significant within-level FDR; suggestive under global FDR). Across taxa combined, the pooled association indicated increased PD risk (OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.11-1.26).
conclusionsThis meta-analysis supports a causal contribution of specific gut taxa to PD risk. Risk-increasing Orders (Enterobacterales, Pasteurellales) and risk-modifying genera/species (Granulicatella, Prevotella salivae; Butyricicoccus, Ruminiclostridium 6) may inform hypothesis-driven prevention and mechanistic studies. PROSPERO: CRD420251128261
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.