Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 731

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Perturbations in Gut Microbiota Composition in Psychiatric Disorders: A Review and Meta-analysis

Open access
Nikolova, Viktoriya L., Smith, Megan R. B., Hall, Lindsay J., Cleare, Anthony J., Stone, James M., Young, Allan H.·2021·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

Importance: Evidence of gut microbiota perturbations has accumulated for multiple psychiatric disorders, with microbiota signatures proposed as potential biomarkers. However, no attempts have been made to evaluate the specificity of these across the range of psychiatric conditions. Objective: To conduct an umbrella and updated meta-analysis of gut microbiota alterations in general adult psychiatric populations and perform a within- and between-diagnostic comparison. Data Sources: Cochrane Library, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase were searched up to February 2, 2021, for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and original evidence. Study Selection: A total of 59 case-control studies evaluating diversity or abundance of gut microbes in adult populations with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, psychosis and schizophrenia, anorexia nervosa, anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Between-group comparisons of relative abundance of gut microbes and beta diversity indices were extracted and summarized qualitatively. Random-effects meta-analyses on standardized mean difference (SMD) were performed for alpha diversity indices. Main Outcomes and Measures: Alpha and beta diversity and relative abundance of gut microbes. Results: A total of 34 studies provided data and were included in alpha diversity meta-analyses (n = 1519 patients, n = 1429 control participants). Significant decrease in microbial richness in patients compared with control participants were found (observed species SMD = −0.26; 95% CI, −0.47 to −0.06; Chao1 SMD = −0.5; 95% CI, −0.79 to −0.21); however, this was consistently decreased only in bipolar disorder when individual diagnoses were examined. There was a small decrease in phylogenetic diversity (SMD = −0.24; 95% CI, −0.47 to −0.001) and no significant differences in Shannon and Simpson indices. Differences in beta diversity were consistently observed only for major depressive disorder and psychosis and schizophrenia. Regarding relative abundance, little evidence of disorder specificity was found. Instead, a transdiagnostic pattern of microbiota signatures was found. Depleted levels of Faecalibacterium and Coprococcus and enriched levels of Eggerthella were consistently shared between major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, psychosis and schizophrenia, and anxiety, suggesting these disorders are characterized by a reduction of anti-inflammatory butyrate-producing bacteria, while pro-inflammatory genera are enriched. The confounding associations of region and medication were also evaluated. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that gut microbiota perturbations were associated with a transdiagnostic pattern with a depletion of certain anti-inflammatory butyrate-producing bacteria and an enrichment of pro-inflammatory bacteria in patients with depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and anxiety.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.2573

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Nikolova, V. L., Smith, M. R. B., Hall, L. J., Cleare, A. J., Stone, J. M., & Young, A. H.
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2021-12-01
Volume
78
Issue
12
Pages
1343
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3199355847
Cited by
731
References
19
FWCI
29.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.