MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964243616 · doi:10.3920/bm2019.0025

Probiotics maintain intestinal secretory immunoglobulin A levels in healthy formula-fed infants: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

2019· article· en· W2964243616 on OpenAlexaff
Lanlin Xiao, Changzhen Gong, Ying Ding, Guodong Ding, Xinyun Xu, C. Q. Deng, Xiaolei Ze, Patrice Malard

Bibliographic record

VenueBeneficial Microbes · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsLallemand (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboAntibodyDouble blindPlacebo-controlled studyGastroenterologyInternal medicineImmunologyPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Formula-fed infants are more susceptible to infectious diseases because they lack the maternal immune factors transferred from breast milk, while their own immune system is still immature. As timely probiotic administration was suggested to promote immune system development in formula-fed infants, this study aimed at assessing the safety and the effects of a probiotic supplement ( Bifidobacterium infantis R0033, Bifidobacterium bifidum R0071, and Lactobacillus helveticus R0052) on mucosal immune competence and digestive function in formula-fed infants. Healthy infants (3.5-6 months old) were randomised to receive either probiotic- (n=66) or placebo-supplemented (n=66) formula once a day for four weeks. In the probiotics group, faecal secretory immunoglobulin A (SIgA) levels remained similar between visit 2 (baseline; V2) and visit 3 (end-of-treatment; V3), but decreased in the placebo group. Changes in SIgA levels following treatment (log 10 ΔV3-V2 [95%CI]) between the probiotic and placebo groups were statistically significant (23 ng/dl [-57;102] and -137 ng/dl [-212;-62], respectively ( P =0.0044; ANCOVA)). While log 10 ΔV3-V2 [95%CI] for salivary SIgA levels increased in both groups, this trend was more pronounced in the probiotics than in the placebo group with an increase of 123 ng/dl [9;236] and 37 ng/dL [-72;147], respectively ( P =0.2829; ANCOVA). The weekly average number of stools/day was significantly higher in the probiotics group compared to placebo during the last week of treatment for the per protocol population. There was no difference in microbiota composition or anthropometric parameters between groups. No serious adverse event was reported, and all adverse events were mild and unrelated to the product or study. Our results show that formula-fed infants receiving probiotics maintained higher faecal SIgA levels at the end of the four-week treatment period, suggesting a positive effect of probiotics on SIgA production. This study demonstrates the safety of this probiotic formulation in infants. Formula-fed infants may benefit from probiotics supplementation to sustain the development of mucosal immunity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBeneficial MicrobesSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207