Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35189598›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurogastroenterology and motility2022

Clinical Trials of Probiotics in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Some Points to Consider.

Eamonn M M Quigley

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Probiotic Development Strategy Centered on Stability and Regulatory Considerations.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. The Effects of Fermented Rice Drink WithJournal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. [Brain-Gut-Microbiota Axis].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eamonn M M QuigleyLynda K and David M Underwood Center for Digestive Disorders, Houston Methodist Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical College, Houston, TX, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4151-7180
Cornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotic products in various formulations are widely used world-wide for a seemingly limitless range of indications--from health maintenance to the alleviation of common intestinal ailments and on to the prevention and treatment of a variety of gastrointestinal diseases and disorders. The profusion of probiotic preparations, together with a very different regulatory climate compared to that which surrounds drugs and devices, leaves the consumer and the health care professional alike bewildered. How can they tell which products truly are what they claim to be? Which probiotics should be chosen for a particular clinical situation? These questions are thrown into stark relief when one evaluates the literature on probiotics in irritable bowel syndrome. To provide some guidance the current probiotic landscape is reviewed and some achievable steps to help bring light to a murky environment are proposed. The goal is to promote verifiable quality control and generate actionable evidence from well-conducted clinical trials of probiotic products in irritable bowel syndrome.

Indexed as

Clinical trialsGenomicsIrritable bowel syndromeMicrobiomeProbiotic

Identifiers

PMID35189598
PMCPMC8978119
OpenAlexW4213294898

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.