A comprehensive review of post-market clinical studies performed in adults with an Asian probiotic formulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probiotics as dietary supplements have been readily accepted by Asian populations. Use of certain probiotic preparations is widespread and the number of clinical trials undertaken with such products is unparalleled in western scientific literature. One such preparation, containing a combination of Enterococcus faecium R0026 and Bacillus subtilis R0179, has 23 publications on post-market clinical studies involving over 1,800 adults. The majority of these publications are printed in Chinese and Korean journals. This review examines the clinical findings with this probiotic combination. As mono-therapy, it has been used to overcome symptoms associated with chronic diarrhoea and irritable bowel syndrome. It has been used as co-adjuvant therapy with sulfasalazine and mesalazine to improve remission times in mild to moderate Ulcerative Colitis and to improve compliance with conventional triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication. While the much of the data is preliminary and the study designs require refinement, the contribution of these trials should not be ignored. The information derived in this review will provide practitioners with practical information on appropriate applications for probiotic supplements, expected outcomes, dosing regimes, safety and reported adverse events. Furthermore, identification of problems in these trials should help researchers design better clinical trials when investigating probiotic products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".