MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415432350 · doi:10.3389/fnut.2025.1652598

The gut microbiota of Indigenous populations in the context of dietary westernization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4415432350 on OpenAlexafffund
Camille Daunizeau, Maximilien Franck, Amélie Boutin, Natalia Poliakova, Pierre Ayotte, Richard E. Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nutrition · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité de SherbrookeThe Quebec Population Health Research Network
FundersCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsIndigenousGut floraContext (archaeology)Gut microbiomeMicrobiome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Indigenous populations worldwide are undergoing dietary transitions from traditional patterns toward westernized diets, influencing gut microbiota diversity and composition, with potential implications for health. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare gut microbiota diversity and composition among Indigenous populations following traditional versus westernized dietary patterns. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted in March 2024 and updated on February 25, 2025 across databases, including All Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, and Food Science and Technology Abstracts, along with searches of gray literature sources. Eligibility criteria included observational studies comparing gut microbiota diversity and composition between traditional and westernized diets among healthy Indigenous adults (≥16 years) without chronic diseases. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the ROBINS-E tool. Data were synthesized using random effects models, specifically applying the restricted maximum likelihood estimator to calculate between-study variance (τ 2 ). Results Of 19,836 articles identified, nine studies ( N = 657 participants) met inclusion criteria. Traditional diets tended to be associated with higher microbial diversity, although results varied across diversity metrics and studies. Shannon diversity was higher in traditional groups, but this difference was not statistically significant (standardized mean differences = 0.67; 95% CI: −0.26 to 1.60; I 2 = 92.9%). Other diversity indices (Chao1, Simpson, observed species richness) did not show clear differences between diet groups. Descriptive taxonomic analyses also revealed substantial heterogeneity across populations, reflecting the context-specificity of microbiota differences between traditional and westernized groups. Nonetheless, most westernized groups exhibited a higher Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio at the phylum level and a lower Prevotella / Bacteroides ratio at the genus level. Conclusion The observed heterogeneity likely reflects methodological differences, ecological variability, and the diversity of traditional diets and varying patterns of dietary transition. Longitudinal research is needed to better understand how dietary transitions affect gut microbiota over time in Indigenous populations. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024597804 .

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)0.000
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 score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NutritionSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207