Recommendations to Improve Quality of Probiotic Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses.

Importance: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses often report conflicting results when assessing evidence for probiotic efficacy, partially because of the lack of understanding of the unique features of probiotic trials. As a consequence, clinical decisions on the use of probiotics have been confusing. Objective: To provide recommendations to improve the quality and consistency of systematic reviews with meta-analyses on probiotics, so evidence-based clinical decisions can be made with more clarity. Evidence Review: For this consensus statement, an updated literature review was conducted (January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022) to supplement a previously published 2018 literature search to identify areas where probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses might be improved. An expert panel of 21 scientists and physicians with experience on writing and reviewing probiotic reviews and meta-analyses was convened and used a modified Delphi method to develop recommendations for future probiotic reviews. Findings: A total of 206 systematic reviews with meta-analysis components on probiotics were screened and representative examples discussed to determine areas for improvement. The expert panel initially identified 36 items that were inconsistently reported or were considered important to consider in probiotic meta-analyses. Of these, a consensus was reached for 9 recommendations to improve the quality of future probiotic meta-analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the expert panel reached a consensus on 9 recommendations that should promote improved reporting of probiotic systematic reviews with meta-analyses and, thereby, assist in clinical decisions regarding the use of probiotics.

A Classification System for Defining and Estimating Dietary Intake of Live Microbes in US Adults and Children.

BACKGROUND: Consuming live microbes in foods may benefit human health. Live microbe estimates have not previously been associated with individual foods in dietary databases. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to estimate intake of live microbes in US children (aged 2-18 y) and adults (≥19 y) (n = 74,466; 51.2% female). METHODS: Using cross-sectional data from the NHANES (2001-2018), experts assigned foods an estimated level of live microbes per gram [low (Lo), <104 CFU/g; medium (Med), 104-107 CFU/g; or high (Hi), >107 CFU/g]. Probiotic dietary supplements were also assessed. The mean intake of each live microbe category and the percentages of subjects who ate from each live microbe category were determined. Nutrients from foods with live microbes were also determined using the population ratio method. Because the Hi category comprised primarily fermented dairy foods, we also looked at aggregated data for Med or Hi (MedHi), which included an expanded range of live microbe-containing foods, including fruits and vegetables. RESULTS: Our analysis showed that 52%, 20%, and 59% of children/adolescents, and 61%, 26%, and 67% of adults, consumed Med, Hi, or MedHi foods, respectively. Per capita intake of Med, Hi, and MedHi foods was 69, 16, and 85 g/d for children/adolescents, and 106, 21, and 127 g/d for adults, respectively. The proportion of subjects who consumed live microbes and overall per capita intake increased significantly over the 9 cycles/18-y study period (0.9-3.1 g/d per cycle in children across categories and 1.4 g/d per cycle in adults for the Med category). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that children, adolescents, and adults in the United States steadily increased their consumption of foods with live microbes between the earliest (2001-2002) and latest (2017-2018) survey cycles. Additional research is needed to determine the relations between exposure to live microbes in foods and specific health outcomes or biomarkers.