MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4205322810 · doi:10.1542/pir.27.4.137

Probiotics

2006· article· en· W4205322810 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Theresa L. Charrois, Gagan Sandhu, Sunita Vohra

Notice bibliographique

RevuePediatrics in Review · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRealmAlternative medicineMedicinePerspective (graphical)Medical educationPsychologyEngineering ethicsPsychotherapistHistory

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Pediatrics in Review is happy to present a new series. It is difficult to define complementary and alternative medicine, but one perspective would be to include methods of treating or preventing disease or improving wellness that have arisen from sources of experience and research different from those traditionally taught in most medical schools and that have not been incorporated into current practice by traditional practitioners. Many of these therapies have arisen from the background of herbal use.The series was proposed by Dr Sunita Vohra, Director of the Complementary and Alternative Research and Education Program at the University of Alberta, Canada, and the initial articles will be written by Dr Vohra and her colleagues in cooperation with the Provisional Section on Contemporary, Holistic, and Integrative Medicine of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP SCHIM).Dr Kathi Kemper, a member of the AAP who is a leading educator in the realm of holistic and alternative medicine and who has been involved in establishing this series, urges colleagues to focus not on the tradition from which any therapy emerges, but on whether the therapy has been studied and proven. It is in the spirit of examining these therapies, which might appear unfamiliar and unusual, with a scientific eye and an open mind that we present these articles, starting with a discussion of probiotics. Significant numbers of our patients are using alternative therapies, usually on their own, and it is important for us to educate ourselves as to what is known about them.—LFNIncreasing evidence supports the use of probiotics to treat and prevent gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. The rationale behind probiotics usage is their ability to normalize microbial flora.Probiotics are nonpathogenic microbes, usually of the lactic acid-producing variety, that are used to improve or normalize the balance of gut microflora. They are available as dietary supplements or in food products (eg, yogurt) as live active culture. A variety of probiotic supplements are available, but LactobacillusGG, Bifidobacterium, and Saccharomyces sp have been studied most extensively. Increasing evidence supports the use of probiotics to prevent and treat various GI disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, acute gastroenteritis, and antibiotic-related diarrhea.Although probiotic preparations are used commonly worldwide, specific use data for children are unavailable.A number of systematic reviews (TableT1) have evaluated the use of probiotic supplements to treat diarrhea. Additionally, numerous randomized, controlled trials have examined their use in constipation, irritable bowel syndrome, Crohn disease, ulcerative colitis, atopy and eczema, Helicobacter pylori colonization and eradication, pancreatitis, cirrhosis, radiation-induced diarrhea, necrotizing enterocolitis, prophylaxis against bacterial sepsis, and urinary tract infections in preterm infants. (6)(7) More data are necessary before probiotics can be recommended as primary therapeutic agents for these disorders.Common empiric uses that have not yet been studied formally include acne, canker sores, colon cancer, heart disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver, and thrush.Clinical trials have not revealed major adverse effects of probiotics in healthy individuals, and long-term consumption also appears to be safe and well tolerated. However, there are case reports of aggravation of existing symptoms, septicemia, pneumonia, and meningitis in severely debilitated, immunocompromised children and in neonates. (8) The safest forms of probiotic bacteria are found in fermented foods, including buttermilk, yogurt, kefir, and sauerkraut. However, supplemental forms usually provide higher doses of probiotic bacteria.Some probiotics (L acidophilus, Lactobacillus GG, Saccharomyces sp) have been found safe for use in children if administered in appropriate doses. Usage has been evaluated in randomized, controlled trials for children as young as 1 month of age.Information is insufficient to recommend safe probiotic supplement usage by women who are pregnant or lactating. Usage of probiotic-containing foods in this population generally is considered safe.Probiotics are believed to modulate immune activity via differential activation of epithelial and immune cell receptors. Postulated mechanisms of action include inhibition of adhesion and invasion by enteroinvasive species into enteric cells, colonization of the gut, enhancement of epithelial cytoprotection, and destruction of receptor sites for toxins.The investigated dosages range from 1 million to 300 billion colony-forming units per day. Probiotic supplements usually are administered as capsules or powder. There is significant discrepancy in the literature as to appropriate doses in children, and the dose varies according to probiotic. Moreover, variations are significant between and within products because production generally is not standardized. Stability is an issue with most probiotic preparations; some may require refrigeration and others (such as S boulardii, which is a yeast product) may not. Patients should be instructed to consider this when selecting a product. Some products can be sprinkled on food or dissolved in beverages, which aids in administration to children. However, because some probiotics are sensitive to gastric acid and bile, they should be administered on an empty stomach. This property is product-specific, and patients should refer to the labeling instructions. Treatment often is initiated at the same time as antibiotic therapy to prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhea. The duration of treatment varies from 1 to 4 weeks following resolution of symptoms.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,681
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,139

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,217
Écart entre enseignants0,206 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePediatrics in ReviewMême sujetProbiotics and Fermented FoodsTravaux en français237 207