MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382725869 · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2023.06.019

Daily consumption of Lactobacillus gasseri CP2305 improves quality of sleep in adults – A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4382725869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Chu, Samir Samman, Barbara C. Galland, Meika Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nutrition · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAsahi Group Holdings
KeywordsMedicineLactobacillus gasseriMeta-analysisSleep qualityFood scienceLactobacillusInternal medicinePsychiatryInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIM: The gut-brain axis is one of the proposed interactions between the brain and peripheral intestinal functions; of particular interest is the influence of food components on the gut-brain axis mediated via the gut microbiome. Probiotics and paraprobiotics have been proposed to interact with the intestinal environment and provide health benefits such as improving sleep quality. The aim of this research was to undertake a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to evaluate the current evidence regarding the effects of Lactobacillus gasseri CP2305 on sleep quality for the general population. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted of peer-reviewed articles published up to 04 November 2022. Randomised controlled trials were identified that investigated the effects of Lactobacillus gasseri CP2305 on sleep parameters in adults. Meta-analysis of the change in the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global score was conducted. Quality assessments of individual studies were conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias and Health Canada tools. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the systematic literature review; six studies included data for meta-analysis to quantify the effect of L. gasseri CP2305 on sleep quality. The ingestion of L. gasseri CP2305 resulted in significant improvement in the PSQI global score compared to control (-0.77, 95% CI: -1.37 to -0.16, P = 0.01). In the two studies that included electroencephalogram (EEG) data, output was significantly improved for at least half of the measured EEG outcomes after consumption of L. gasseri CP2305. No serious concerns were found in the potential biases of included studies, indirectness of the included evidence, and other methodological issues. CONCLUSION: The present systematic review and meta-analysis indicates significant improvement in sleep quality of adults with mild to moderate stress as an effect of daily consumption of L. gasseri CP2305. Based on existing evidence, the relationship between L. gasseri CP2305 and enhanced sleep quality is plausible, however further investigations are required to confirm the mechanisms of actions for this effect.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical NutritionSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207