The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effect of probiotics on functional constipation in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
Background Functional constipation is a prevalent, burdensome gastrointestinal disorder whose treatment remains challenging. Probiotics have been increasingly investigated in its management.Objective The aim was to investigate the effect of probiotics on gut transit time, stool output, and constipation symptoms in adults with functional constipation via a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Design Studies were identified by searching 4 electronic databases, back-searching reference lists, contacting authors, and hand-searching abstracts. RCTs that reported administration of probiotics in adults with functional constipation were included. Two reviewers independently performed the screening, data extraction, and bias assessment. Outcome data were synthesized by using weighted mean differences (WMDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with the use of a random-effects model.Results A total of 660 records were identified of which 14 were eligible (1182 patients). Overall, probiotics significantly reduced whole gut transit time by 12.4 h (95% CI: -22.3, -2.5 h) and increased stool frequency by 1.3 bowel movements/wk (95% CI: 0.7, 1.9 bowel movements/wk), and this was significant for Bifidobacterium lactis (WMD: 1.5 bowel movements/wk; 95% CI: 0.7, 2.3 bowel movements/wk) but not for Lactobacillus casei Shirota (WMD: -0.2 bowel movements/wk; 95% CI: -0.8, 0.9 bowel movements/wk). Probiotics improved stool consistency (SMD: +0.55; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.82), and this was significant for B. lactis (SMD: +0.46; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.85) but not for L. casei Shirota (SMD: +0.26; 95% CI: -0.30, 0.82). No serious adverse events were reported. Attrition and reporting bias were high, whereas selection bias was unclear due to inadequate reporting.Conclusions Probiotics may improve whole gut transit time, stool frequency, and stool consistency, with subgroup analysis indicating beneficial effects of B. lactis in particular. However, caution is needed with the interpretation of these data due to their high heterogeneity and risk of bias. Adequately powered RCTs are required to better determine the species or strains, doses, and duration of use of probiotics that are most efficacious.
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.
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 cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“maltodextrin has been successfully used 9 as a placebo in numerous trials in constipation, with a meta-analysis showing no change on WGTT 8 .”
From Randomised clinical trial: Bifidobacterium lactis NCC2818 probiotic vs placebo, and impact on gut transit time, symptoms, and gut microbiology in chronic constipation (2019) · cites this paper as [8]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Similarly, two systematic reviews and meta-analyses - that investigated the effect of various probiotics on WGTT in healthy and constipated individuals - showed that probiotic consumption significantly decreased WGTT, with B. lactis strains HN019 and DN-173010 conferring the largest treatment effects, particularly in constipated individuals compared to healthy people 8 26 .”
From Randomised clinical trial: Bifidobacterium lactis NCC2818 probiotic vs placebo, and impact on gut transit time, symptoms, and gut microbiology in chronic constipation (2019) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“which showed that other B. 18 lactis strains significantly increased stool frequency by an average of 1.5 bowel movements per week, and 19 improved stool consistency and other constipation-related symptoms 8 .”
From Randomised clinical trial: Bifidobacterium lactis NCC2818 probiotic vs placebo, and impact on gut transit time, symptoms, and gut microbiology in chronic constipation (2019) · cites this paper as [8]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“while differing with the findings of the aforementioned meta-analysis,”
In the citing paper
“a recent meta analysis of randomized controlled trials have revealed that Bifidobacterium lactis, but not for Lactobacillus casei Shirota, reduced whole gut transit time and increased stool frequency in constipated patients”
From Gut microbiota role in irritable bowel syndrome: New therapeutic strategies (2016) · cites this paper as [210]
In the citing paper
“Bifidobacterium lactis, but not for Lactobacillus casei Shirota, reduced whole gut transit time and increased stool frequency in constipated patients”
From Gut microbiota role in irritable bowel syndrome: New therapeutic strategies (2016) · cites this paper as [210]
In the citing paper
“an earlier systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized–controlled trials indicated that probiotics may improve the whole-gut transit time, stool frequency, and stool consistency; Bifidobacterium lactis showed better efficacies than Lactobacillus casei Shirota [ 81 ].”
From Role of gut microbiota in functional constipation (2021) · cites this paper as [81]
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
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136 · Cited by 10,349
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I² index?
Huedo-Medina, T. B., Sánchez-Meca, J., Marín-Martínez, F., & Botella, J. (2006) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.11.2.193 · Cited by 4,256
Shekhar, C., Monaghan, P. J., Morris, J., Issa, B., Whorwell, P. J., Keevil, B. G., & Houghton, L. A. (2013) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2013.07.014 · Cited by 2,891
Meta-analyses involving cross-over trials: methodological issues
Elbourne, D. R., Altman, D. G., Higgins, J. P., Curtin, F., Worthington, H. V., & Vail, A. (2002) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/31.1.140 · Cited by 2,305
Burden of Gastrointestinal Disease in the United States: 2012 Update
Peery, A. F., Dellon, E. S., Lund, J. L., Crockett, S. D., McGowan, C., Bulsiewicz, W. J., Gangarosa, L. M., Thiny, M. T., Stizenberg, K., Morgan, D. R., et al. (2012) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.08.002 · Cited by 2,010
Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food
Who, F. (2002) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,843
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- He, 2009, Effect of probiotic yogurt containing Bifidobacterium animalis strain DN-173 010 on symptoms of constipation, Chin J Gastroenterol, 14, 287
- Takii, 2012, Effects of fermented milk containing Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis GCL2505 on improvement of defecation, fecal properties, and intestinal microflora, Jpn Pharmacol Ther, 40, 657
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dimidi, E., Christodoulides, S., Scott, S. M., & Whelan, K. (2017) · Advances in Nutrition · doi:10.3945/an.116.014407 · Cited by 468
Self-citationProbiotics and prebiotic fiber for constipation associated with Parkinson disease: An RCT
Barichella, M., Pacchetti, C., Bolliri, C., Cassani, E., Iorio, L., Pusani, C., Pinelli, G., Privitera, G., Cesari, I., Faierman, S. A., et al. (2016) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000003127 · Cited by 390
Gut microbiota role in irritable bowel syndrome: New therapeutic strategies
Distrutti, E., Monaldi, L., Ricci, P., & Fiorucci, S. (2016) · World Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3748/wjg.v22.i7.2219 · Cited by 320
Whelan, K., Martin, L. D., Staudacher, H. M., & Lomer, M. C. E. (2018) · Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics · doi:10.1111/jhn.12530 · Cited by 322
Self-citationBlack, C. J., & Ford, A. C. (2018) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/mja18.00241 · Cited by 231
Metadata
- Authors
- Dimidi, E., Christodoulides, S., Fragkos, K. C., Scott, S. M., & Whelan, K.
- Affiliations
- Queen Mary University of London (GB)
- Venue
- The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-10
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1075-1084
- ISSN
- 0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2012951812
- Cited by
- 316
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 3.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Nestec
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
- Keywords
- probiotics, functional constipation, gut transit time, stool frequency, stool consistency, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis, Lactobacillus casei Shirota, adults, constipation treatment, adverse events, reporting bias, attrition bias, selection bias, subgroup analysis, quality of evidence, gut microbiota, dietary fat, dietary fiber intake
- MeSH terms
- Constipation, Defecation, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Probiotics
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
