Cited by 43Probiotics and Fermented FoodsComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesGastrointestinal motility and disorders

Helping patients make informed choices about probiotics: a need for research

Open access
Sharp, Richard R, Achkar, Jean-Paul, Brinich, Margaret A, Farrell, Ruth M·2009·The American Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract

Applications of probiotics in the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders are gaining acceptance among patients, despite evidence that probiotics can present substantial health risks, particularly for patients who are immunocompromised or seriously ill. Patients will likely formulate their attitudes and beliefs about probiotic therapies with reference to interpretive frameworks that compare probiotics with more familiar therapeutic modalities, including complementary and alternative medicines, pharmacological therapies, and gene-transfer technologies. Each of these frameworks highlights a different set of benefit-to-risk considerations regarding probiotic usage and reinforces extreme characterizations of both the therapeutic promise and peril of probiotics. Considerable effort may be required to help patients make informed choices about probiotic therapies.

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 · 10.1038/ajg.2008.68

Cites

49 of 49 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?

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
Sharp, R. R., Achkar, J.-P., Brinich, M. A., & Farrell, R. M.
Affiliations
Cleveland Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Sharp, Richard R
Venue
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2009-04
Volume
104
Issue
4
Pages
809-813
ISSN
  • 0002-9270 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-0241
OpenAlex
W2049721160
Cited by
43
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG004877)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
Keywords
probiotics, informed consent, patient decision-making, gastrointestinal diseases, immunocompromised patients, risk-benefit assessment, complementary and alternative medicine, patient attitudes and beliefs
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Diseases, Humans, Informed Consent, Patient Compliance, Patient Education as Topic, Physician-Patient Relations, Probiotics, Biomedical Research

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