A review of the systematic review process and its applicability for use in evaluating evidence for health claims on probiotic foods in the European Union

被引:0
|
作者
Julie Glanville
Sarah King
Francisco Guarner
Colin Hill
Mary Ellen Sanders
机构
[1] York Health Economics Consortium LTD,Alimentary Pharmabiotic Centre
[2] University Hospital Vall d’Hebron,undefined
[3] University College Cork,undefined
[4] Dairy & Food Culture Technologies,undefined
关键词
Systematic reviews; Meta-analysis; Probiotics; EFSA; Regulatory; Health claims;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This paper addresses the use of systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the strength of evidence for health benefits of probiotic foods, especially relating to health claim substantiation in the European Union. A systematic review is a protocol-driven, transparent and replicable approach, widely accepted in a number of scientific fields, and used by many policy-setting organizations to evaluate the strength of evidence to answer a focused research question. Many systematic reviews have been published on the broad category of probiotics for many different outcomes. Some of these reviews have been criticized for including poor quality studies, pooling heterogeneous study results, and not considering publication bias. Well-designed and -conducted systematic reviews should address such issues. Systematic reviews of probiotics have an additional challenge – rarely addressed in published reviews - in that there must be a scientifically sound basis for combining evidence on different strains, species or genera. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is increasingly adopting the systematic review methodology. It remains to be seen how health claims supported by systematic reviews are evaluated within the EFSA approval process. The EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies deems randomized trials to be the best approach to generating evidence about the effects of foods on health outcomes. They also acknowledge that systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) are the best approach to assess the totality of the evidence. It is reasonable to use these well-established methods to assess objectively the strength of evidence for a probiotic health claim. Use of the methods to combine results on more than a single strain or defined blend of strains will require a rationale that the different probiotics are substantively similar, either in identity or in their mode of action.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] European Working Time Directive and doctors' health: a systematic review of the available epidemiological evidence
    Cruz Rodriguez-Jareno, Maria
    Demou, Evangelia
    Vargas-Prada, Sergio
    Sanati, Kaveh A.
    Skerjanc, Alenka
    Reis, Pedro G.
    Helimaki-Aro, Ritva
    Macdonald, Ewan B.
    Serra, Consol
    BMJ OPEN, 2014, 4 (07):
  • [22] How Can the Use of Evidence in Mental Health Policy Be Increased? A Systematic Review
    Williamson, Anna
    Makkar, Steve R.
    McGrath, Catherine
    Redman, Sally
    PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES, 2015, 66 (08) : 783 - 797
  • [23] SYSTEMATIC REVIEW: THE USE OF RESEARCH EVIDENCE BY PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY-MAKERS
    Orton, L.
    Lloyd-Williams, F.
    Taylor-Robinson, D.
    O'Flaherty, M.
    Capewell, S.
    JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 2010, 64 : A21 - A21
  • [24] The Use of Research Evidence in Public Health Decision Making Processes: Systematic Review
    Orton, Lois
    Lloyd-Williams, Ffion
    Taylor-Robinson, David
    O'Flaherty, Martin
    Capewell, Simon
    PLOS ONE, 2011, 6 (07):
  • [25] Systematic review and its relationship to evidence-based practice in public health
    Mignini, L.
    MEDICINA DE FAMILIA-SEMERGEN, 2022, 48 (05): : 295 - 296
  • [26] Life contexts among patrolling police officers in the European Union, investigating environmental characteristics and health - A protocol for a scoping review and a systematic review
    Granholm Valmari, Elin
    Ghazinour, Mehdi
    Nygren, Ulla
    Gilenstam, Kajsa
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 2023, 30 (07) : 1135 - 1142
  • [27] A review of the process of knowledge transfer and use of evidence in reproductive and child health in Ghana
    Abekah-Nkrumah, Gordon
    Issiaka, Sombie
    Virgil, Lokossou
    Ermel, Johnson
    HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2018, 16
  • [28] A review of the process of knowledge transfer and use of evidence in reproductive and child health in Ghana
    Gordon Abekah-Nkrumah
    Sombié Issiaka
    Lokossou Virgil
    Johnson Ermel
    Health Research Policy and Systems, 16
  • [29] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 9: Assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic review
    John N Lavis
    Andrew D Oxman
    Nathan M Souza
    Simon Lewin
    Russell L Gruen
    Atle Fretheim
    Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [30] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 9: Assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic review
    Lavis, John N.
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Souza, Nathan M.
    Lewin, Simon
    Gruen, Russell L.
    Fretheim, Atle
    HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 398 - 404