Evidence mapPaperPMID 40745489Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology2025

Credible inferences in microbiome research: ensuring rigour, reproducibility and relevance in the era of AI.

Alberto Caminero, Carolina Tropini, Mireia Valles-Colomer, Dennis L Shung, Sean M Gibbons, Michael G Surette, Harry Sokol, Nicholas J Tomeo, Scientific Advisory Board of the Center for Gut Microbiome Research and Education of the American Gastroenterological Association, Phillip I Tarr and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Artificial intelligence for animal science: from applications to integrated knowledge systems.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

11 authors.

Alberto CamineroDepartment of Medicine, Farncombe Family Digestive Disease Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9555-7167
Carolina TropiniSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of British Columbia, Canada Humans and the Microbiome Program, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7542-1577
Mireia Valles-ColomerDepartment of Medicine and Life Sciences, University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Dennis L ShungDigestive Diseases, Biomedical Informatics & Data Science, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8226-1842
Sean M GibbonsInstitute for Systems Biology, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8724-7916
Michael G SuretteDepartment of Medicine, Farncombe Family Digestive Disease Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Harry SokolSorbonne Université, INSERM UMRS-938, Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine, CRSA, AP-HP, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2914-1822
Nicholas J TomeoClinical and Scientific Affairs, American Gastroenterological Association, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2309-6511
Scientific Advisory Board of the Center for Gut Microbiome Research and Education of the American Gastroenterological Association
Phillip I TarrDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition, Department of Paediatrics, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. tarr@wustl.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4078-7517
Elena F VerduDepartment of Medicine, Farncombe Family Digestive Disease Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. verdue@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6346-2665

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The microbiome has critical roles in human health and disease. Advances in high-throughput sequencing and metabolomics have revolutionized our understanding of human gut microbial communities and identified plausible associations with a variety of disorders. However, microbiome research remains constrained by challenges in establishing causality, an over-reliance on correlative studies, and methodological and analytical limitations. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a powerful tool to address these challenges; however, the seamless integration of preclinical models and clinical trials is crucial to maximizing the translational impact of microbiome studies. This manuscript critically evaluates best methodological practices and limitations in the field, focusing on how emerging AI tools can bridge the gap between microbial insights and clinical applications. Specifically, we emphasize the necessity of rigorous, reproducible methodologies that integrate multiomics approaches, preclinical models and clinical trials in the AI-driven era. We propose a practical framework for applying AI to microbiome studies, alongside strategic recommendations for clinical trial design, regulatory pathways, and best practices for microbiome-based informed diagnostics, AI training and clinical interventions. By establishing these guidelines, we aim to accelerate the translation of microbiome research into clinical practice, enabling precision medicine approaches informed by the human microbiome.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceGastrointestinal MicrobiomeMicrobiotaHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.