MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2272911116 · doi:10.1586/1744666x.2016.1147955

Probiotics for treatment and primary prevention of allergic diseases and asthma: looking back and moving forward

2016· review· en· W2272911116 on OpenAlexaff
Christina West, Maria C. Jenmalm, Anita L. Kozyrskyj, Susan L. Prescott

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Clinical Immunology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDysbiosisContext (archaeology)Observational studyAsthmaRandomized controlled trialMicrobiomeIntensive care medicineGut floraClinical trialImmunologyBioinformaticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbial ecosystems cover the surface of the human body and it is becoming increasingly clear that our modern environment has profound effects on microbial composition and diversity. A dysbiotic gut microbiota has been associated with allergic diseases and asthma in cross-sectional and observational studies. In an attempt to restore this dysbiosis, probiotics have been evaluated in randomized controlled trials. Here, we review treatment and primary prevention studies, recent meta-analyses, and discuss the current understanding of the role of probiotics in this context. Many meta-analyses have shown a moderate benefit of probiotics for eczema prevention, whereas there is less evidence of a benefit for other allergic manifestations. Because of very low quality evidence and heterogeneity between studies, specific advice on the most effective regimens cannot yet be given - not even for eczema prevention. To be able to adopt results into specific recommendations, international expert organizations stress the need for well-designed studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Clinical ImmunologySame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207