The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Lactobacillus reuteri(American Type Culture Collection Strain 55730) Versus Simethicone in the Treatment of Infantile Colic: A Prospective Randomized Study
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The goal was to test the hypothesis that oral administration of Lactobacillus reuteri in a prospective randomized study would improve symptoms of infantile colic. METHODS. Ninety breastfed colicky infants were assigned randomly to receive either the probiotic L reuteri (108 live bacteria per day) or simethicone (60 mg/day) each day for 28 days. The mothers avoided cow's milk in their diet. Parents monitored daily crying times and adverse effects by using a questionnaire. RESULTS. Eighty-three infants completed the trial: 41 in the probiotic group and 42 in the simethicone group. The infants were similar regarding gestational age, birth weight, gender, and crying time at baseline. Daily median crying times in the probiotic and simethicone groups were 159 minutes/day and 177 minutes/day, respectively, on the seventh day and 51 minutes/day and 145 minutes/day on the 28th day. On day 28, 39 patients (95%) were responders in the probiotic group and 3 patients (7%) were responders in the simethicone group. No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS. In our cohort, L reuteri improved colicky symptoms in breastfed infants within 1 week of treatment, compared with simethicone, which suggests that probiotics may have a role in the treatment of infantile colic.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Oral Probiotics Prevent Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Very Low Birth Weight Neonates
Bin-Nun, A., Bromiker, R., Wilschanski, M., Kaplan, M., Rudensky, B., Caplan, M., & Hammerman, C. (2005) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2005.03.054 · Cited by 590
Weizman, Z., Asli, G., & Alsheikh, A. (2005) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-1815 · Cited by 548
Mothers' postpartum psychological adjustment and infantile colic
Akman, I. (2006) · Archives of Disease in Childhood · doi:10.1136/adc.2005.083790 · Cited by 167
Bacterial counts of intestinal Lactobacillus species in infants with colic
Savino, F., Bailo, E., Oggero, R., Tullio, V., Roana, J., Carlone, N., Cuffini, A. M., & Silvestro, L. (2005) · Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · doi:10.1111/j.1399-3038.2005.00207.x · Cited by 94
Self-citation
Cited by
Role of Lactobacillus reuteri in Human Health and Diseases
Mu, Q., Tavella, V. J., & Luo, X. M. (2018) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.00757 · Cited by 744
Spinler, J. K., Taweechotipatr, M., Rognerud, C. L., Ou, C. N., Tumwasorn, S., & Versalovic, J. (2008) · Anaerobe · doi:10.1016/j.anaerobe.2008.02.001 · Cited by 332
Schaefer, L., Auchtung, T. A., Hermans, K. E., Whitehead, D., Borhan, B., & Britton, R. A. (2010) · Microbiology · doi:10.1099/mic.0.035642-0 · Cited by 310
Intestinal microbiota of infants with colic: development and specific signatures
de Weerth, C., Fuentes, S., Puylaert, P., & de Vos, W. M. (2013) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2012-1449 · Cited by 279
Indrio, F., Di Mauro, A., Riezzo, G., Civardi, E., Intini, C., Corvaglia, L., Ballardini, E., Bisceglia, M., Cinquetti, M., Brazzoduro, E., et al. (2014) · JAMA Pediatrics · doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.4367 · Cited by 228
Metadata
- Authors
- Savino, F., Pelle, E., Palumeri, E., Oggero, R., & Miniero, R.
- Venue
- Pediatrics
- Publisher
- American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
- Published
- 2007-01-01
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e124-e130
- ISSN
- 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-4275
- OpenAlex
- W2136909898
- Cited by
- 306
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 61.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Lactobacillus reuteri(American Type Culture Collection Strain 55730) Versus Simethicone in the Treatment of Infantile Colic: A Prospective Randomized Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1542/peds.2006-1222
- The paper
- Savino, F., Pelle, E., Palumeri, E., Oggero, R., & Miniero, R. (2007). Lactobacillus reuteri(American Type Culture Collection Strain 55730) Versus Simethicone in the Treatment of Infantile Colic: A Prospective Randomized Study. Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-1222
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
