Cited by 703Probiotics and Fermented FoodsMicrobial Metabolites in Food BiotechnologyGut microbiota and health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The immunomodulatory properties of probiotic microorganisms beyond their viability (ghost probiotics: proposal of paraprobiotic concept)

Open access
Taverniti, Valentina, Guglielmetti, Simone·2011·Genes & Nutrition

Abstract

The probiotic approach represents a potentially effective and mild alternative strategy for the prevention and treatment of either inflammatory or allergic diseases. Several studies have shown that different bacterial strains can exert their probiotic abilities by influencing the host's immune system, thereby modulating immune responses. However, the emerging concern regarding safety problems arising from the extensive use of live microbial cells is enhancing the interest in non-viable microorganisms or microbial cell extracts, as they could eliminate shelf-life problems and reduce the risks of microbial translocation and infection. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the scientific literature concerning studies in which dead microbial cells or crude microbial cell fractions have been used as health-promoting agents. Particular attention will be given to the modulation of host immune responses. Possible mechanisms determining the effect on the immune system will also be discussed. Finally, in the light of the FAO/WHO definition of probiotics, indicating that the word 'probiotic' should be restricted to products that contain live microorganisms, and considering the scientific evidence indicating that inactivated microbes can positively affect human health, we propose the new term 'paraprobiotic' to indicate the use of inactivated microbial cells or cell fractions to confer a health benefit to the consumer.

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 · 10.1007/s12263-011-0218-x

Cites

77 of 77 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Inactivation methods may affect structural components of the cell differently, and therefore their biological activities.

    “Importantly, these methods of inactivation may affect structural components of the cell differently, and therefore their biological activities [264, 265].”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. FAO/WHO (2002) Report of a joint FAO/WHO expert consultation on guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, London Ontario, Canada

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Taverniti, V., & Guglielmetti, S.
Affiliations
University of Milan (IT)
Corresponding author
Guglielmetti, Simone
Venue
Genes & Nutrition
Published
2011-04-16
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
261-274
ISSN
  • 1555-8932 (ISSN-L)
  • 1865-3499
OpenAlex
W2073900522
Cited by
703
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 74 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
FWCI
17.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes & Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Microbial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
probiotics, paraprobiotics, immunomodulation, microbial translocation, probiotic safety

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