Trial reportScientific reports2026
Impact of dietary protein quantity on the non-dysbiotic human microbiome: a controlled feeding study.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gut microbiome plays an essential role in human health, and alterations in its composition have been associated with a range of gastrointestinal and metabolic disorders. Diet is one of the most important modifiable factors influencing the gut microbiome, with dietary protein known to affect microbial composition and metabolic activity. However, the impact of varying levels of dietary protein on the human gut microbiome remains incompletely understood. This controlled crossover feeding study examined whether diets providing 10% versus 25% of total energy intake from protein alter stool microbiome profiles in healthy adults. Ten participants, four men and six women aged 22–34 years, completed a controlled crossover feeding trial provisioned by the Bionutrition Unit of the Clinical & Translational Research Center at Oregon Health & Science University. Each diet phase consisted of a 3-day run in diet (18% protein) followed by either a 10% protein (lower-protein) or a 25% protein (higher-protein) diet for 7 days in a randomized order, and then, after a washout period, the run in diet followed by the alternate dietary intervention. Anthropometric measurements, dietary tolerance, diet satisfaction, and stool samples for microbiome 16 S rRNA gene sequencing and short chain fatty acids (SCFA), analysis were collected at 5 time points throughout the study. Body mass index was lower after than before the higher-protein diet (p < 0.01). Minor dietary tolerance symptoms included constipation in one participant on the higher-protein diet, mild discomfort in three participants, and fatigue in seven participants on the lower-protein diet. Diet satisfaction was similar (p = 0.28). Stool microbiome composition varied more by individual (57.8%) than by diet (3.5%). No significant changes in dysbiosis scores (p = 0.68), microbiome diversity (p > 0.05), or SCFA concentrations (p > 0.05) were observed. Short-term consumption of dietary protein at 10% or 25% of total energy intake did not result in significant differences in microbiome diversity or SCFA concentrations. This observation may be due in part to the short duration of the study intervention, the subjects’ identity factors, and the different sources of protein in the two intervention diets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.