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
  • [31] What is the Prevalence of Low Health Literacy in European Union Member States? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Baccolini, V
    Rosso, A.
    Di Paolo, C.
    Isonne, C.
    Salerno, C.
    Migliara, G.
    Prencipe, G. P.
    Massimi, A.
    Marzuillo, C.
    De Vito, C.
    Villari, P.
    Romano, F.
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2021, 36 (03) : 753 - 761
  • [32] What is the Prevalence of Low Health Literacy in European Union Member States? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    V. Baccolini
    A. Rosso
    C. Di Paolo
    C. Isonne
    C. Salerno
    G. Migliara
    G. P. Prencipe
    A. Massimi
    C. Marzuillo
    C. De Vito
    P. Villari
    F. Romano
    Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2021, 36 : 753 - 761
  • [33] Political and Institutional Influences on the Use of Evidence in Public Health Policy. A Systematic Review
    Liverani, Marco
    Hawkins, Benjamin
    Parkhurst, Justin O.
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (10):
  • [34] Health economic evidence for the use of molecular biomarker tests in hematological malignancies: A systematic review
    Vu, Martin
    Degeling, Koen
    Thompson, Ella R.
    Blombery, Piers
    Westerman, David
    IJzerman, Maarten J.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY, 2022, 108 (06) : 469 - 485
  • [35] The Use of Prebiotic and Probiotic Interventions for Treating Gastrointestinal and Psychosocial Health Symptoms in Cancer Patients and Survivors: A Systematic Review
    Deleemans, Julie M.
    Gajtani, Zen
    Baydoun, Mohamad
    Reimer, Raylene A.
    Piedalue, Katherine-Ann
    Carlson, Linda E.
    INTEGRATIVE CANCER THERAPIES, 2021, 20
  • [36] The Examination of Process Evaluation Use in Church-Based Health Interventions: A Systematic Review
    Yeary, Karen Hye-Cheon Kim
    Klos, Lori A.
    Linnan, Laura
    HEALTH PROMOTION PRACTICE, 2012, 13 (04) : 524 - 534
  • [37] Mapping the Qualitative Evidence Base on the Use of Research Evidence in Health Policy-Making: A Systematic Review
    Verboom, Ben
    Baumann, Aron
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT, 2022, 11 (07) : 883 - 898
  • [38] The process of systematic review and its application in agri-food public-health
    Sargeant, J. M.
    Rajic, A.
    Read, S.
    Ohlsson, A.
    PREVENTIVE VETERINARY MEDICINE, 2006, 75 (3-4) : 141 - 151
  • [39] Evaluating Process and Outcomes of Public Involvement in Applied Health and Social Care Research: A Rapid Systematic Review
    Wearn, Angela
    Brennan-Tovey, Kerry
    Adams, Emma A.
    Alderson, Hayley
    Baariu, Judy
    Cheetham, Mandy
    Bartle, Victoria
    Palfreyman, Lucy
    Rook, Violet
    Shenton, Felicity
    Ramsay, Sheena E.
    Kaner, Eileen
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2025, 28 (01)
  • [40] Evaluating the Validity Evidence Surrounding the Use of Value-Added Models to Evaluate Teachers: A Systematic Review
    Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey
    Lavery, Matthew Ryan
    Holloway, Jessica
    Pivovarova, Margarita
    Hahs-Vaughn, Debbie L.
    EDUCATION POLICY ANALYSIS ARCHIVES, 2023, 31