ReviewSAGE open medicine2026
The impact of probiotics and synbiotics supplementation on bone health; an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis.
Review in SAGE open medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The effects of probiotics and synbiotics on bone health remain uncertain due to conflicting results across existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs). Methods: PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched through February 2025. SRs/MAs on probiotics or synbiotics for bone health were included. An umbrella review with meta-analysis of pooled effect sizes was conducted using random-effects models: Hedges' g for bone mineral density (BMD) and muscle mass, and mean difference for muscle strength. Heterogeneity was assessed via I Results: Our initial search identified 930 articles (488 from PubMed/MEDLINE, 260 from Web of Science, and 182 from Cochrane). After removing duplicates and screening titles, abstracts, and full texts, sixteen systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included (with 3,245 participants), and only human studies were considered for meta-analysis. Most studies investigated Conclusion: Probiotic/synbiotic supplementation showed modest, statistically significant BMD benefits, but with substantial heterogeneity. Findings for muscle mass and strength were based on a few meta-analyses, showed high heterogeneity, and sensitivity analyses nullified significance. Current evidence does not support clinical recommendations for probiotics/synbiotics in bone health prevention.
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.