CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 151Gastrointestinal motility and disordersProbiotics and Fermented FoodsGut microbiota and health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ineffectiveness of Lactobacillus GG as an adjunct to lactulose for the treatment of constipation in children: A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial

Banaszkiewicz, Aleksandra, Szajewska, Hania·2005·The Journal of Pediatrics
DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.10.022
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To determine if Lactobacillus GG (LGG) is an effective adjunct to lactulose for treating constipation in children.Study design Eighty-four children (2-16 years of age) with constipation (<3 spontaneous bowel movements [BMs] per week for at least 12 weeks) were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial in which they received 1 mL/kg/day of 70% lactulose plus 10 9 colony-forming units (CFU) of LGG (experimental group, n = 43) or a placebo (control group, n = 41) orally twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was treatment success, and analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis.Results Treatment success, defined as >or=3 spontaneous BMs per week with no fecal soiling, was similar in the control and experimental groups at 12 weeks (28/41 [68%] vs 31/43 [72%], respectively; P = .7) and at 24 weeks (27/41 [65%] vs 27/42 [64%], respectively; P = 1.0]. Groups also did not differ in their mean number of spontaneous BMs per week or episodes of fecal soiling per week at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. Adverse events and overall tolerance did not differ between groups.Conclusion LGG, as dosed in this study, was not an effective adjunct to lactulose in treating constipation in children.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.10.022

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Niemi, 2001, Effects of fiber-rich rye bread and yoghurt with Lactobacillus GG on bowel movement, Am J Clin Nutr, 73, 490S
  2. Hosoda, 1998, Effects of fermented milk with Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG strain administration on defecation, putrefactive metabolites and fecal microflora of healthy volunteers, J Nutritional Food, 1, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–151 of 151

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Banaszkiewicz, A., & Szajewska, H.
Affiliations
Medical University of Warsaw (PL)
Corresponding author
Szajewska, Hania
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Pediatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-03
Volume
146
Issue
3
Pages
364-369
ISSN
0022-3476 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.10.022
OpenAlex
W2076373003
Cited by
150
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • The Journal of Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, lactulose, pediatric constipation, probiotics, adjunctive therapy, fecal soiling, spontaneous bowel movements, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Algorithms, Child, Child, Preschool, Constipation, Defecation, Double-Blind Method, Gastrointestinal Agents, Humans, Lactobacillus, Lactulose, Treatment Outcome, Probiotics

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