CAN PROBIOTICS PLUS VITAMIN D SUPPLEMENTS BENEFIT PEOPLE WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cochrane Library.The single most reliable source of evidence in healthcareThe Cochrane Reviews highlighted below are available from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (www.thecochranelibrary.com) Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to feedback, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should always be consulted for the most recent version of the review. Can probiotics plus vitamin D supplements benefit people with schizophrenia?APRIL 10, 2024 -Previous studies have questioned whether gut microbe imbalances and vitamin D deficiency may be linked to schizophrenia.New research published in Neuropsychopharmacology Reports now indicates that taking probiotics plus vitamin D supplements may improve cognitive function in individuals with the disease.For the study, 70 adults with schizophrenia were randomized to take a placebo or probiotic supplements plus 400 IU vitamin D daily for 12 weeks.Severity of the disease and cognitive function were evaluated by tests called the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the 30-point Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), respectively.A total of 69 patients completed the study.The MoCA score increased by 1.96 units in the probioticcontaining supplement group compared with the placebo group.Also, the percentage of patients with MoCA scores of 26 or higher (indicating normal cognition) rose significantly in the intervention group.Between-group differences in PANSS scores were not significant."Probiotics may be a novel way to treat mental disorders by regulating gut microbiota," said corresponding
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.031 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".