SynthesisRevista de neurologia2026
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Parkinson's Disease: An Exploration Based on UPDRS and Cognitive Scores.
Synthesis in Revista de neurologia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is a common neurodegenerative disorder that has been increasingly linked to gut-brain axis dysfunction. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), a microbiome-targeted intervention, has shown theoretical and preliminary clinical potential in PD, but randomized clinical evidence remains limited. This review aimed to systematically evaluate the effects of FMT on motor, non-motor, and cognitive outcomes in patients with PD.
methodsA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FMT with placebo or conventional care in PD was conducted. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Pooled analyses were performed using a random-effects model, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
resultsFive RCTs involving 226 participants were included. No statistically significant differences were observed between the FMT and control groups in Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Parts I-III, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), or Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores at any assessed follow-up time, with heterogeneity generally low to moderate across outcomes.
conclusionsBased on current evidence from five small RCTs, FMT did not demonstrate a statistically significant benefit for motor, daily living, or cognitive outcomes in PD. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, given the limited sample size, short follow-up duration, and between-study differences in intervention protocols. Larger, well-designed RCTs with standardized FMT protocols and longer follow-up are needed. The PROSPERO Registration: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD420251121443, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251121443.
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.