Recommendations to Improve Quality of Probiotic Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses

dc.contributor.authorMcFarland Lynne V.
dc.contributor.authorHecht Gail
dc.contributor.authorSanders Mary E.
dc.contributor.authorGoff Debra A.
dc.contributor.authorGoldstein Ellie J. C.
dc.contributor.authorHill Colin
dc.contributor.authorJohnson Stuart
dc.contributor.authorKashi Maryam R.
dc.contributor.authorKullar Ravina
dc.contributor.authorMarco Maria L.
dc.contributor.authorMerenstein Daniel J.
dc.contributor.authorMillette Mathieu
dc.contributor.authorPreidis Geoffrey A.
dc.contributor.authorQuigley Eamonn M. M.
dc.contributor.authorReid Gregor
dc.contributor.authorSalminen Seppo
dc.contributor.authorSniffen Jason C.
dc.contributor.authorSokol Harry
dc.contributor.authorSzajewska Hania
dc.contributor.authorTancredi Daniel J.
dc.contributor.authorWoolard Kristin
dc.contributor.organizationfi=ravitsemus- ja ruokatutkimuskeskus|en=Nutrition and Food Research Center (NuFo)|
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.12007811941
dc.converis.publication-id380708527
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/380708527
dc.date.accessioned2025-08-27T21:59:34Z
dc.date.available2025-08-27T21:59:34Z
dc.description.abstractSystematic reviews and meta-analyses often report conflicting results when assessing evidence for probiotic efficacy, partially because of the lack of understanding of the unique features of probiotic trials. As a consequence, clinical decisions on the use of probiotics have been confusing.To provide recommendations to improve the quality and consistency of systematic reviews with meta-analyses on probiotics, so evidence-based clinical decisions can be made with more clarity.For this consensus statement, an updated literature review was conducted (January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022) to supplement a previously published 2018 literature search to identify areas where probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses might be improved. An expert panel of 21 scientists and physicians with experience on writing and reviewing probiotic reviews and meta-analyses was convened and used a modified Delphi method to develop recommendations for future probiotic reviews.A total of 206 systematic reviews with meta-analysis components on probiotics were screened and representative examples discussed to determine areas for improvement. The expert panel initially identified 36 items that were inconsistently reported or were considered important to consider in probiotic meta-analyses. Of these, a consensus was reached for 9 recommendations to improve the quality of future probiotic meta-analyses.In this study, the expert panel reached a consensus on 9 recommendations that should promote improved reporting of probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses and, thereby, assist in clinical decisions regarding the use of probiotics.
dc.identifier.eissn2574-3805
dc.identifier.jour-issn2574-3805
dc.identifier.olddbid201552
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/184579
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/48484
dc.identifier.urlhttps://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.46872
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2025082789486
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorSalminen, Seppo
dc.okm.discipline3141 Health care scienceen_GB
dc.okm.discipline3141 Terveystiedefi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationinternational co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA2 Scientific Article
dc.publisherJAMA Network
dc.publisher.countryUnited Statesen_GB
dc.publisher.countryYhdysvallat (USA)fi_FI
dc.publisher.country-codeUS
dc.relation.articlenumber2346872
dc.relation.doi10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.46872
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJAMA Network Open
dc.relation.issue12
dc.relation.volume6
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/184579
dc.titleRecommendations to Improve Quality of Probiotic Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses
dc.year.issued2023

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
mcfarland_2023_cs_230009_1701378890.97813.pdf
Size:
1.11 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format