Cited by 16Probiotics and Fermented FoodsViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyInfant Nutrition and Health

Emergency Department Treatment of Children With Diarrhea Who Attend Day Care: A Randomized Multidose Trial of a Lactobacillus helveticus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus Combination Probiotic

Freedman, Stephen B., Sherman, Philip M., Willan, Andrew, Johnson, David, Gouin, Serge, Schuh, Suzanne, on behalf of Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC)·2015·Clinical Pediatrics

Abstract

Background Benefits associated with probiotic administration to children seeking emergency department care with diarrheal disease are unknown. Methods In this 3-site, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, children aged 4 to 48 months with gastroenteritis were randomized to receive 5 days of placebo, low-dose (4 × 10(9) colony forming units per day), or high-dose (8 × 10(9) colony forming units per day) probiotic (Lactobacillus helveticus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus) in a 2:1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was day care absenteeism. Results The proportion of children missing a day of day care was 63% (39/62) and 61% (37/61) in the placebo and probiotic arms, respectively (95%CI -14.6% to 18.9%). The proportions experiencing unscheduled health care provider visits and intravenous fluid rehydration were 24% (15/62), 7% (4/62), and 30% (18/61), 5% (3/61) in the placebo and probiotic study arms, respectively (P = .52 and P = .65). None of the results differed based on probiotic dose. Conclusions The probiotic evaluated did not reduce absenteeism. Since power was suboptimal, further evaluation is required.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0009922815569200

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The identity and viability of probiotic organisms were evaluated by bacteriology and molecular methods in seven studies, and independently of the study team in two of these.

    “The identity and viability of probiotic organisms were evaluated by bacteriology and molecular methods in seven studies (Freedman 2015; Freedman 2018a; Hong Chau 2018; Mao 2008; Rosenfeldt 2002a; Rosenfeldt 2002b; Schnadower 2018), and were evaluated independently of the study team in two of these studies (Freedman 2015; Schnadower 2018).”

    From Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea (2020) · cites this paper as Freedman 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Freedman, S. B., Sherman, P. M., Willan, A., Johnson, D., Gouin, S., Schuh, S., & (PERC), O. B. O. P. E. R. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Calgary (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine (CA)
Venue
Clinical Pediatrics
Published
2015-02-10
Volume
54
Issue
12
Pages
1158-1166
ISSN
  • 0009-9228 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-2707
OpenAlex
W2137065100
Cited by
16
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Viral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
Keywords
probiotics, Lactobacillus helveticus, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, childhood diarrhea, gastroenteritis, emergency department care
MeSH terms
Child Day Care Centers, Child, Preschool, Diarrhea, Double-Blind Method, Education Department, Hospital, Emergency Medical Services, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Male, Prospective Studies, Treatment Outcome, Probiotics, Lactobacillus helveticus, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus

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