Cited by 210Gut microbiota and healthPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesProbiotics and Fermented Foods

Polyphenol supplementation benefits human health via gut microbiota: a systematic review via meta-analysis

Open access
Ma, Guiling, Chen, Yanting·2020·Journal of Functional Foods

Abstract

Polyphenol supplementation attracts much research attentions due to beneficial effects on human health. Gut microbiota significantly shape human health, but polyphenols in changing human gut microbiota remain elusive. This study aimed to use meta-analytic methods to reveal the effects of polyphenol-rich foods on the abundance of human gut microbiota. Significant heterogeneity analysis showed the polyphenol intake dose and sources variedly affected on abundance of gut microbiota. Polyphenol supplementation stimulated the abundance of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium health promoting species, but inhibited the abundance of Clostridium pathogenic species in gut microbiota of human subjects. Notably, peak increase of abundance of Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Clostridum health promoting species was at polyphenol intake of 396 mg/d, 540 mg/d, and 593 mg/d respectively. Taken together, polyphenol supplementation shapes gut microbiota species, contributing to benefits in human health.

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 · 10.1016/j.jff.2020.103829

Cites

76 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Polyphenols display a prebiotic-like effect, increasing the growth of beneficial bacterial strains, such as bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, while reducing the number of potential pathogens, such as C. perfringens and C. histolyticum in a dose-dependent manner.

    “Polyphenols display a “prebioticlike” effect, increasing the growth of beneficial bacterial strains, such as bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, while reducing the number of potential pathogens, such as C. perfringens and C. histolyticum in a dose-dependent manner (83,84).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ma, G., & Chen, Y.
Affiliations
Washington State University (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Yanting
Venue
Journal of Functional Foods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
66
Pages
103829
ISSN
1756-4646 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3005174056
Cited by
210
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 21 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Functional Foods (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Washington State University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
Keywords
polyphenols, dietary supplementation, gut microbiota, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Clostridium, polyphenol-rich foods, human health

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