Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37894110›Full record

ReviewMicroorganisms2023

Gut Probiotics and Health of Dogs and Cats: Benefits, Applications, and Underlying Mechanisms.

Qing Yang, Zhenlong Wu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microorganisms, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Dietary Supplementation withAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. The Effects of DietaryAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qing YangState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Department of Companion Animal Science, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4108-9561
Zhenlong WuState Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Department of Companion Animal Science, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
China Agricultural University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pets (mostly domestic dogs and cats) play an important role in the daily lives of humans and their health has attracted growing attention from pet owners. The intestinal microbiota, a complex microbial community with barrier-protective, nutritional, metabolic, and immunological functions, is integral to host health. Dysbiosis has been related to a variety of diseases in humans and animals. Probiotics have been used in functional foods and dietary supplements to modulate intestinal microbiota and promote host health, which has been introduced in pet dogs and cats in recent years. Various canine- and feline-derived probiotic strains have been isolated and characterized. The administration of probiotics has shown positive effects on the gut health and can alleviate some intestinal diseases and disorders in dogs and cats, although the underlying mechanisms are largely unresolved. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on the benefits of probiotics and discuss their possible mechanisms in dogs and cats in order to provide new insights for the further development and application of probiotics in pets.

Indexed as

catcompanion animaldogintestinal healthmicrobiomeprobiotics

Identifiers

PMID37894110
PMCPMC10609632
OpenAlexW4387187521

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.