MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385335394 · doi:10.3389/frmbi.2023.1180565

The impact of neonatal intensive care unit antibiotics on gut bacterial microbiota of preterm infants: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4385335394 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martin M. Mulinge, S. Mwanza, Hellen M. Kabahweza, Dalton Wamalwa, Ruth Nduati

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiomes · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVLIRUOSFogarty International CenterVlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad
KeywordsAntibioticsNeonatal intensive care unitMedicineBifidobacteriumDiscontinuationPediatricsGut floraInternal medicineBiologyMicrobiologyImmunologyBacteriaLactobacillus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preterm infants encounter an unnatural beginning to life, with housing in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) where they are exposed to antibiotics. Although the effectiveness of antibiotics in infection control is well established, the short- and long-term unintended effects on the microbiota of preterm infants receiving antibiotic treatment are yet to be quantified. Our aim was to investigate the unintended consequences of NICU antibiotics on preterm infants’ gut microbiota. We searched three electronic databases—Embase, PubMed, and Scopus—for records from 2010 to October 2022. Eligibility criteria included intervention and observational studies that collected stool samples and analyzed microbiota data on the effect of antibiotics on the gut microbiota of preterm infants using 16S rRNA sequencing. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and the quality of the studies was judged using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool for assessing risk of bias (RoB2) for clinical trials, while non-randomized studies were assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). The initial searches yielded 7,605 papers, of which 21 were included in the review. The selected studies examined 3,669 stool samples that were collected longitudinally from 878 preterm infants in seven different countries. Preterm infants exposed to antibiotics had a reduced bacterial diversity, an increased relative abundance of pathogenic bacteria such as Enterobacteriaceae, and a decrease or absence of symbiotic bacteria such as Bifidobacterium spp., which have been shown to assist in immunity development. Antibiotic discontinuation restored diversity, with variances linked to the antibiotic spectrum and treatment duration in some but not all cases. Breastfeeding confounded the association between antibiotic use and dysbiosis. Intriguingly, the reduction of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), a crucial neurotransmitter for early brain development, was linked to the depletion of Veillonella spp. Despite the apparent benefits of using antibiotics on preterm infants, we conclude that they should be used only when absolutely necessary and for a short period of time. Mothers’ milk is recommended to hasten the restoration of disrupted microbiota.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.008
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MicrobiomesSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207