Use and Acceptance of the Clinical Guide to Probiotic Products Available in Canada and in US: Translating Scientific Evidence to Clinical Practice Since 2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This clinical reference tool is independently designed to translate scientific evidence available up to date for commercially available probiotic products into practical, clinically relevant information, enabling clinicians to easily select the appropriate product, dose, and format for a specific indication. Published studies with defined clinical outcomes for probiotic strain(s) were searched using defined inclusion criteria. Commercially available products containing said strain(s) were identified, and the Levels of Recommendation were used to rate the strength of the evidence. This information was compiled into a chart form, assessed by independent expert reviewers. This guide is a clinical decision-making tool to assist health care professionals in providing evidence-based recommendations for their patients. In the case of probiotics, the clinical evidence supports only certain formulations/brand names of the probiotics (including the genus, species, alphanumeric designation or strain, number of live bacteria present, the blend of probiotic strains present, and finally, the non-active ingredients present). The authors made every attempt to include the published clinical data for the available probiotic formulations. In the clinical guide, the available strains were organized based on probiotic strain(s), doses, and evaluated evidence levels based on our pre-defined criteria. This document is easily accessible in print and digital formats (websites and mobile apps). There is evidence to support the use of oral and vaginal probiotic products for various aspects of human health, however, applications and results are strain-specific and disease or symptom-specific. Due to frequent changes in commercial availability of probiotic strains, newly published evidence, and growing research, an annual review and updates of this Clinical Guide have been conducted since 2008. Lack of adverse effects supports the widespread use of these products, and further investigation is recommended. Abstract submission is supported by an unrestricted education grant provided by the Alliance for Education on Probiotics.
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 | 0.048 | 0.239 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.031 |
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".