ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Probiotics for treating acute diarrhea in children: an evidence synthesis.
Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- State-of-the-Art Review on Probiotics, Synbiotics, and Microbial Metabolites: Molecular Mechanisms Shaping Host Immunity, Metabolic Health, and Chronic Disease Prevention.Molecular nutrition & food research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of probiotics against diarrhea in children. Background: Acute diarrhea remains the leading cause of childhood morbidity and mortality worldwide and is one of the most common reasons for child visits and hospitalizations. Methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of probiotics for the treatment of acute diarrhea in children were identified by searching EMBASE, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the Clinicaltrials.gov registry with a search deadline of September 29, 2023. Fixed- and random-effects models were employed, using standardized mean differences (SMDs), relative risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as outcome indicators. Primary outcomes included the duration of the child's diarrhea and the number of children with diarrhea at the completion of the trial, and secondary outcomes included the length of the child's hospitalization, the frequency of stools on day 2 post-intervention, and the number of recoveries within 3 days of the intervention. We performed this according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Results: The study included 25 randomized controlled trials involving 9,071 subjects. After the intervention, moderate evidence indicated that, probiotics shortened the duration of diarrhea in children (SMD=-0.44, 95% CI: -0.70∼-0.17), increased the number of children who recovered from diarrhea, reduced the number of children with diarrhea at the completion of the trial (RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54∼0.86), and reduced the number of stools on d 2 (SMD=-0.38, 95% CI: -0.59∼-0.18), but the quality of evidence was very low. However, there was no effect on children's length of hospitalization (SMD=-0.27, 95% CI: -0.63∼0.09) and the number of recoveries within 3 d after the intervention (RR = 1.70, 95% CI: 0.98∼2.97). Among these, probiotics reduced the average duration of diarrhea by approximately 1.21 days. For the primary outcome, subgroup analyses based on individual probiotic strains, Conclusion: The results showed that probiotics demonstrated adequate clinical efficacy in shortening the duration of diarrhea, increasing the number of recoveries in children with diarrhea, reducing the number of diarrhea cases, and alleviating diarrhea symptoms. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, PROSPERO CRD42024534039.
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.