Bifidobacterium bifidum R0071 decreases stress-associated diarrhoea-related symptoms and self-reported stress: a secondary analysis of a randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychological stress is associated with gastrointestinal (GI) distress. This secondary analysis from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study examined whether three different probiotics could normalise self-reported stress-associated GI discomfort and reduce overall self-reported stress. Undergraduate students (n=581) received Lactobacillus helveticus R0052, Bifidobacterium longum ssp. infantis R0033, Bifidobacterium bifidum R0071, or placebo. Participants self-reported 2 outcomes for a 6-week period, which included final academic exams: daily level of stress (0=no stress to 10=extremely stressed) and weekly three diarrhoea-related symptoms (DS, 1=no discomfort to 7=severe discomfort) using the GI Symptom Rating Scale. Self-reported stress was positively related to DS (P=0.0068). Mean DS scores were lower with B. bifidum versus placebo at week 2 at the average level of stress and the average body mass index (BMI). DS scores were lower with B. bifidum at week 5 versus week 0 and 1 and with B. infantis R0033 at week 6 versus week 0. DS scores were higher when antibiotics were used in the prior week with placebo (P=0.0092). DS were not different with or without antibiotic use with the probiotics. Only B. bifidum had an effect on self-reported stress scores (P=0.0086). The self-reported stress score was also dependent on hours of sleep per day where it decreased by 0.13 for each additional hour of sleep. During a stressful period, B. bifidum R0071 decreases DS and self-reported stress scores. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01709825.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".