Comparison with healthy controls: meta-analysis of changes in intestinal flora in Chinese patients with irritable bowel syndrome
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background The characteristics of the gut microbiota in Chinese patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and their association with the disease remain unclear. Although current studies have revealed some changes in the gut microbiota of IBS patients, these changes vary across different studies and no consistent conclusions have been reached. Additionally, geographical differences may lead to unique microbial characteristics in IBS patients, which could serve as potential diagnostic tools or therapeutic targets. We hypothesize that the gut microbiota of Chinese IBS patients exhibits unique compositional and functional characteristics that differ significantly from those of healthy individuals. Aim To investigate differential characteristics of gut microbiota in Chinese patients with IBS compared to healthy controls (HC). Methods We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases from their inception to May 2025. The search strategy was built around key concepts of IBS, gut microbiota, and China, combining subject headings (e.g., MeSH terms) and free-text keywords. The search was performed in line with the PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they were case-control studies comparing gut microbiota between IBS patients and all participants were Chinese, IBS diagnosis adhered to internationally recognized Rome criteria, HCs were free from gastrointestinal diseases, and sufficient data were provided for meta-analysis. Exclusion criteria encompassed non-case-control designs, studies involving non-Chinese populations or mixed control groups, unavailable or insufficient data, and studies of low methodological quality (NOS score < 5). Study selection was carried out by two researchers independently. Data were extracted and quality assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The quality assessment was independently conducted by two researchers, and any discrepancies were resolved with the assistance of a third researcher. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software, with standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity among studies. When I2 > 50%, indicating significant heterogeneity, the random effects model was used for calculations. Otherwise, the fixed effects model was applied. Results This meta-analysis of 12 studies (766 IBS patients, 351 HC) revealed that Chinese IBS patients exhibited significantly higher abundance of Enterobacter (SMD = 1.55; 95% CI=[0.90,2.19]; P < 0.00001) and Enterococcus (SMD = 0.69; 95% CI=[0.25, 1.13]; P = 0.002), but lower Lactobacillus (SMD=-1.30; 95% CI=[-1.71, -0.89]; P < 0.00001) and Bifidobacterium (SMD=-1.56; 95% CI=[-2.04, -1.09]; P < 0.00001) versus HC, with no Bacteroides difference. In IBS-D Patients, Enterobacter (SMD = 1.47; 95% CI=[0.75, 2.19]; P < 0.0001) and Enterococcus (SMD = 0.53; 95% CI=[0.06, 1.01]; P = 0.03) remained elevated, while Lactobacillus (SMD=-1.39; 95% CI=[-1.76,-1.02];P < 0.00001), Bifidobacterium (SMD=-1.66; 95% CI=[-2.15,-1.17];P < 0.00001), and Bacteroides (SMD=-0.72; 95% CI=[-1.05, -0.39]; CI=[-1.05,-0.39];P < 0.0001) decreased significantly. IBS-C patients showed no significant differences in these genera. Conclusion This meta-analysis reveals gut microbiota imbalances in Chinese IBS patients: significantly increased Enterobacter and Enterococcus with decreased Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium overall, and reduced Bacteroides specifically in IBS-D.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,019 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,014 | 0,031 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».