Skip to main content

Table 2 Assessment of risk of bias in the studies reviewed

From: Alterations in fecal microbiota composition by probiotic supplementation in healthy adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Study

Concealment of randomization

RCT stopped early

Patients blinded

Healthcare providers blinded

Data collectors blinded

Outcome assessors blinded

Reporting drop-out or withdrawal

Other potential bias

Selective outcome reporting

Jadad score

Lahti et al. 2013 [22]

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

4

Rampelli et al. 2013 [23]

Yes

No

Yes

Uncleara

Uncleara

Uncleara

Unclear

Yesc

Yesc

3

Ferrario et al. 2014 [27]

Yes

No

Yes

Uncleara

Uncleara

Uncleara

Yes

No

No

3

Bjerg et al. 2015 [19]

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yesb

No

5

Brahe et al. 2015 [20]

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

4

Hanifi et al. 2015 [21]

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yesb

No

5

Simon et al. 2015 [24]

Yes

No

Yes

Uncleara

Uncleara

Uncleara

Yes

No

No

4

  1. Based on PRISMA (and Cochrane)’s tools for assessing risk of bias. The Jadad score is a three-item instrument that evaluates likelihood of bias in terms of quality of randomization, quality of blinding, and reasons for withdrawal/drop-out. It is compiled of the following quality items from the table: Concealment of randomization, Patients blinded, Healthcare providers blinded, Data collectors blinded, Outcome assessors blinded, and Reporting drop-out or withdrawal
  2. aDouble-blinded study but unclear whether healthcare providers, data collectors, and outcome assessors were all blinded
  3. bPerformed next-generation sequencing on fecal samples from a subgroup of the included individuals. Bjerg et al. selected 10 (of 32) placebo-treated and 10 (of 32) probiotic-treated participants with the highest triacylglycerol concentration in the blood at week 0. Hanifi et al. selected 20 (all) placebo-treated and 17 (of 20) probiotic-treated participants from the group with the highest dose (10 × 109 colony-forming units) of the probiotic treatment
  4. cNo direct comparison between treatment groups was made for the age-related dysbiosis