Microbiome-Targeted Therapies as an Adjunct to Traditional Weight Loss Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study evaluated the effect of microbiome-targeted therapies (pre-, pro-, and synbiotics) on weight loss and other anthropometric outcomes when delivered as an adjunct to traditional weight loss interventions in overweight and obese adults. Methods: A systematic review of three databases (Medline [PubMed], Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) was performed to identify randomized controlled trials published between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2020, that evaluated anthropometric outcomes following microbiome-targeted supplements in combination with dietary or dietary and exercise interventions. The pooled mean difference (MD) between treatment and control groups was calculated using a random effects model. Results: Twenty-one trials with 1233 adult participants (76.4% female) with overweight or obesity were included. Separate meta-analyses were conducted for probiotics (n=11 trials) and synbiotics (n=10 trials) on each anthropometric outcome; prebiotics were excluded as only a single study was found. Patient characteristics and methodologies varied widely between studies. All studies incorporated some degree of caloric restriction, while only six studies included recommendations for adjunct exercise. Compared with dietary or dietary and exercise interventions only, probiotics resulted in reductions in body weight (MD: -0.73 kg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.02 to -0.44, p < 0.001), fat mass (MD: -0.61 kg; 95% CI: -0.77 to -0.45; p<0.001) and waist circumference (MD: -0.53 cm; 95% CI: -0.99 to -0.07, p=0.024) while synbiotics resulted in reductions in fat mass (MD: -1.53 kg; 95% CI: -2.95 to -0.12, p=0.034) and waist circumference (MD: -1.31 cm; 95% CI: -2.05 to -0.57, p<0.001). Conclusion: This analysis indicates that microbiome-targeted supplements may enhance weight loss and other obesity outcomes in adults when delivered as an adjunct to dietary or dietary and exercise interventions. Personalized therapy to include microbiome-targeted supplements may help to optimize weight loss in overweight and obese individuals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".