CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 430Gastrointestinal motility and disordersGut microbiota and healthProbiotics and Fermented Foods

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Diet Low in FODMAPs Reduces Symptoms in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome and A Probiotic Restores Bifidobacterium Species: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Staudacher, Heidi Maria, Lomer, Miranda C.E., Farquharson, Freda M., Louis, Petra, Fava, Francesca, Franciosi, Elena, Scholz, Matthias, Tuohy, Kieran M., Lindsay, James O., Irving, Peter M., Whelan, Kevin·2017·Gastroenterology
DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.06.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background & aims Dietary restriction of fermentable carbohydrates (a low FODMAP diet) has been reported to reduce symptoms in some patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled study to determine its effects on symptoms and the fecal microbiota in patients with IBS.Methods We performed a 2×2 factorial trial of 104 patients with IBS (18-65 years old), based on the Rome III criteria, at 2 hospitals in the United Kingdom. Patients were randomly assigned (blinded) to groups given counselling to follow a sham diet or diet low in FODMAPs for 4 weeks, along with a placebo or multistrain probiotic formulation, resulting in 4 groups (27 receiving sham diet/placebo, 26 receiving sham diet/probiotic, 24 receiving low FODMAP diet /placebo, and 27 receiving low FODMAP diet/probiotic). The sham diet restricted a similar number of staple and non-staple foods as the low FODMAP diet; the diets had similar degrees of difficulty to follow. Dietary counselling was given to patients in all groups and data on foods eaten and compliance were collected. The incidence and severity of 15 gastrointestinal symptoms and overall symptoms were measured daily for 7 days before the study period; along with stool frequency and consistency. At baseline, global and individual symptoms were measured, along with generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life, using standard scoring systems. All data were collected again at 4 weeks, and patients answered questions about adequate symptom relief. Fecal samples were collected at baseline and after 4 weeks and analyzed by quantitative PCR and 16S rRNA sequencing. The co-primary endpoints were adequate relief of symptoms and stool Bifidobacterium species abundance at 4 weeks.Results There was no significant interaction between the interventions in adequate relief of symptoms (P = .52) or Bifidobacterium species (P = .68). In the intention-to-treat analysis, a higher proportion of patients in the low FODMAP diet had adequate symptom relief (57%) than in the sham diet group (38%), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = .051). In the per-protocol analysis, a significantly higher proportion of patients on the low FODMAP diet had adequate symptom relief (61%) than in the sham diet group (39%) (P = .042). Total mean IBS-Severity Scoring System score was significantly lower for patients on the low FODMAP diet (173 ± 95) than the sham diet (224 ± 89) (P = .001), but not different between those given probiotic (207 ± 98) or placebo (192 ± 93) (P = .721) Abundance of Bifidobacterium species was lower in fecal samples from patients on the low FODMAP diet (8.8 rRNA genes/g) than patients on the sham diet (9.2 rRNA genes/g) (P = .008), but higher in patients given probiotic (9.1 rRNA genes/g) than patients given placebo (8.8 rRNA genes/g) (P = .019). There was no effect of the low FODMAP diet on microbiota diversity in fecal samples.Conclusions In a placebo-controlled study of patients with IBS, a low FODMAP diet associates with adequate symptom relief and significantly reduced symptom scores compared with placebo. It is not clear whether changes resulted from collective FODMAP restriction or removal of a single component, such as lactose. Co-administration of the multistrain probiotic increased numbers of Bifidobacterium species, compared with placebo, and might be given to restore these bacteria to patients on a low FODMAP diet. Trial registration no: ISRCTN02275221.

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 · 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.06.010

Cites

40 of 40 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?

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

Show all 40 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–430 of 430

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Staudacher, H. M., Lomer, M. C. E., Farquharson, F. M., Louis, P., Fava, F., Franciosi, E., Scholz, M., Tuohy, K. M., Lindsay, J. O., Irving, P. M., & Whelan, K.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • Fondazione Edmund Mach (IT)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Whelan, Kevin
ORCID
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-10
Volume
153
Issue
4
Pages
936-947
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1053/j.gastro.2017.06.010
OpenAlex
W2625582958
Cited by
430
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 11
FWCI
50.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • Own your potential (DEAKIN) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Fondazione Edmund Mach) (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
Keywords
irritable bowel syndrome, low FODMAP diet, probiotics, Bifidobacterium, gut microbiota, dietary restriction, gastrointestinal symptoms, symptom relief, health-related quality of life, nutrition counseling, stool consistency, stool frequency, Rome III criteria, 16S rRNA gene sequencing, real-time PCR, dietary adherence
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Adult, Bifidobacterium, Combined Modality Therapy, Dietary Carbohydrates, Feces, Female, Fermentation, Humans, Intestines, London, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Remission Induction, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Probiotics, Ribotyping, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Diet, Carbohydrate-Restricted, Young Adult

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