Effect of Bacillus subtilis ATCC 122264 on intestinal gas symptoms and quality of life in adults with functional bloating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probiotics can confer a beneficial effect on gastrointestinal-related symptoms and their impact on daily life. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed the efficacy of a novel probiotic strain Bacillus subtilis ATCC 122264 as a probiotic on gas-related symptoms in healthy adults. One hundred healthy adults with functional bloating/distension according to the ROME IV criteria, were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 5 billion cfu of B. subtilis) or placebo daily for 8 weeks. Intestinal gas symptoms and impact on daily life were assessed weekly by the 17-item Intestinal Gas Questionnaire (IGQ) and the change from baseline was analysed by ANCOVA at 4 and 8 weeks. Post-hoc analyses were conducted on the two parts of the IGQ, scored separately. Sub-group analyses based on sex were also done on the IGQ global and dimension scores as well as the scores from the two individual parts of the IGQ. Safety was assessed by reports of adverse events. B. subtilis did not differ from placebo in the change from baseline to Weeks 4 or 8 in IGQ global score or dimension scores of bloating, flatulence, belching, bad breath, stomach rumbling and difficult gas evacuation ( P > 0.05). In females taking B. subtilis, the severity of belching and flatulence significantly decreased after 4 ( P = 0.046) and 8 weeks ( P = 0.039) respectively, compared to females taking placebo. The impact of flatulence on daily life decreased after 8 weeks in females taking B. subtilis compared to placebo ( P = 0.03). B. subtilis was safe and well tolerated over the 8-week study period. The results suggest that B. subtilis may reduce gas-related symptoms, such as bloating and flatulence, in females. Further studies are needed to confirm the sex-related effects of B. subtilis in populations with gastrointestinal symptoms. Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT06308146.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".