Abstract P3174: The Benefits of Probiotic Administration in Stroke Risk, Stroke-Related Gastrointestinal Complications, and Intestinal Flora Dysbiosis: A Meta-Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Stroke is the second largest cause of death and third leading cause of disability worldwide. Some high-income countries have one in five lifetime cases and one in two in low-income countries. Due to the high stroke burden and aging population, better preventive and treatment approaches are needed. Recent research shows that stroke patients have a different gut microbiota than healthy people, suggesting a relationship between dysbiosis and stroke incidence and prognosis. Probiotics may improve stroke outcomes by strengthening the intestinal barrier and reducing inflammation. Hypothesis: Our study seeks to evaluate the potential benefits of probiotic supplementation in reducing the risk of ischemic stroke in healthy individuals as well as its impact on the prognosis of stroke patients, specifically in reducing gastrointestinal complications and improving gut microbiota balance (reduce dysbiosis). Methods: We conducted an umbrella meta-analysis of meta-analyses published in the last 10 years using PRISMA guidelines in PubMed. Using RevMan 5.4, we performed an inverse variance random effects model to calculate log (odds ratio) and converted it to pooled OR and 95% confidence interval to obtain a forest plot keeping alpha criteria 0.05. Heterogeneity and risk of bias assessment (by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were assessed. Results: While probiotic supplementation in healthy individuals did not significantly decrease the risk of ischemic stroke (OR 0.87 [95%CI 0.75-1.01]), it showed notable benefits in stroke patients. These positive effects included a substantial reduction in the odds of specific GI complications (constipation, diarrhea, gastric retention, esophageal reflux, vomiting, stress ulcers, and gastrointestinal bleeding) by 62% (0.38, 0.29-0.51), non-specific GI complications by 72% (0.28, 0.24-0.34), infection by 73% (0.27, 0.21-0.33) and a significant improvement in gut flora balance, reducing the odds of dysbiosis by 79% (0.21, 0.12-0.36). (p<0.00001) The inter-study heterogeneity was 91% with (p<0.00001, Chi 2 =128.76), a moderate risk of bias. Conclusion: Our umbrella meta-analysis highlights the potential benefits of probiotic supplementation in stroke patients, particularly in mitigating stroke-related GI complications and alleviating intestinal flora dysbiosis. These findings underscore the crucial role of gut-brain interactions in stroke and suggest that probiotics may serve as a promising component of stroke management.
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 | 0.014 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.074 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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; 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".