Cited by 87Probiotics and Fermented FoodsMicrobial Metabolites in Food BiotechnologyGut microbiota and health

Prebiotics, probiotics, fermented foods and cognitive outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Open access
Marx, Wolfgang, Scholey, Andrew, Firth, Joseph, D’Cunha, Nathan M., Lane, Melissa, Hockey, Meghan, Ashton, Melanie M., Cryan, John F. +5 more·2020·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials that investigated the use of probiotic, prebiotic, and fermented food interventions for cognitive performance. In total, 22 studies (n = 1551) were included that investigated probiotics (11 studies, n = 724), prebiotics (5 studies, n = 355), and fermented foods (6 studies, n = 472). Despite several individual studies (14 of 22) reporting significant improvements in specific cognitive domains, results of the pooled meta-analysis found no significant effect for any intervention for global cognition (Probiotics: g = 0.115, 95 %CI -0.041, 0.270, p = 0.148; Prebiotics: g = 0.077, 95 %CI -0.091, 0.246, p = 0.369; Fermented food: g = 0.164 95 %CI -0.017, 0.345, p = 0.076) or any individual cognitive domain. Most studies (16 of 22) had low risk of bias. These results do not support the use of probiotic, prebiotic, and fermented food interventions for cognitive outcomes. This may be due to the limited number of small and short-term studies as well clinical heterogeneity relating to the population, cognitive tests, and intervention. Therefore, further trials that investigate these interventions in clinical populations using adequately powered samples are warranted. PROSPERO: CRD42019137936.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.036

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Another systematic review evaluating the utility of prebiotics, probiotics, and fermented food interventions on cognitive performance had negative findings, possibly due to the limited number of small and short-term studies, as well as clinical heterogeneity relating to the population, cognitive tests, and interventions.

    “Another systematic review evaluating the utility of prebiotics, probiotics, and fermented food interventions on cognitive performance had negative findings, possibly due to the limited number of small and short-term studies, as well as clinical heterogeneity relating to the population, cognitive tests, and interventions (489).”
  • Another recent meta-analysis and systematic review concluded that current evidence from human trials does not support the efficacy of probiotics, prebiotics, and fermented food in affecting cognitive function, although the quality and quantity of available data limit firm conclusions.

    “On the other hand, another recent meta-analysis and systematic review concluded that the current evidence from human trials does not support the efficacy of probiotics, prebiotics, and fermented food in affecting cognitive function, although the quality and quantity of the available data limit firm conclusions (229);”
  • There is a lack of studies investigating the same strain of probiotic or type of prebiotic, and probiotic- and prebiotic-specific effects are often observed.

    “for example, there is lack of studies investigating the same strain of probiotic or type of prebiotic, and probiotic-and prebiotic-specific effects are often observed.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marx, W., Scholey, A., Firth, J., D’Cunha, N. M., Lane, M., Hockey, M., Ashton, M. M., Cryan, J. F., O’Neil, A., Naumovski, N., Berk, M., Dean, O. M., & Jacka, F.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • University College Cork (IE)
  • University of Canberra (AU)
Corresponding author
Marx, Wolfgang
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
118
Pages
472-484
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3081422897
Cited by
87
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Deakin University
  • Australian Rotary Health
  • Deakin University postgraduate scholarship
  • Dementia Australia Research Foundation
  • Abbott Nutrition
  • Australian Research Council
  • Arla Foods
  • Australian Wine Research Institute
  • Bayer, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  • Cognis
  • Cyvex
  • DuPont
  • European Commission Framework 5 Research and Innovation initiative
  • Fonterra
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Ginsana
  • Kemin Foods
  • Martek
  • Masterfoods
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • Naturex
  • Nestlé
  • Neurobrands
  • Nutricia-Danone
  • Red Bull
  • Sanofi
  • Verdure Sciences
  • Wrigley Science Institute
  • NHMRC Senior Principal Research Fellowship (1059660, APP1156072)
  • Australasian Society for Bipolar Depressive Disorders, Lundbeck
  • Ian Parker Bipolar Research Fund
  • Cooperative Research Centre for Mental Health
  • University of Manchester Presidential Fellowship (P123958)
  • UK Research and Innovation Future Leaders Fellowship (MR/T021780/1)
  • NICM-Blackmores Institute Fellowship
  • Heart Foundation, Australia (#101160)
  • Geelong Medical Research Foundation
  • Ian Potter Foundation
  • Eli Lilly, Meat and Livestock Australia
  • Woolworths Limited
  • Fernwood Gyms
  • Wilson Foundation
  • GMHBA
  • University of Melbourne
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, prebiotics, fermented foods, cognitive performance, global cognition, cognitive domain, gut microbiota, dietary intervention
MeSH terms
Fermented Foods, Cognition, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Probiotics, Prebiotics

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