Cargando…

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

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, wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Glanville, Julie, King, Sarah, Guarner, Francisco, Hill, Colin, Sanders, Mary Ellen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4334596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12937-015-0004-5
_version_ 1782358212605902848
author Glanville, Julie
King, Sarah
Guarner, Francisco
Hill, Colin
Sanders, Mary Ellen
author_facet Glanville, Julie
King, Sarah
Guarner, Francisco
Hill, Colin
Sanders, Mary Ellen
author_sort Glanville, Julie
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4334596
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43345962015-02-20 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 Glanville, Julie King, Sarah Guarner, Francisco Hill, Colin Sanders, Mary Ellen Nutr J Review 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. BioMed Central 2015-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4334596/ /pubmed/25889449 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12937-015-0004-5 Text en © Glanville et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Review
Glanville, Julie
King, Sarah
Guarner, Francisco
Hill, Colin
Sanders, Mary Ellen
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort review of the systematic review process and its applicability for use in evaluating evidence for health claims on probiotic foods in the european union
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4334596/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12937-015-0004-5
work_keys_str_mv AT glanvillejulie areviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT kingsarah areviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT guarnerfrancisco areviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT hillcolin areviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT sandersmaryellen areviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT glanvillejulie reviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT kingsarah reviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT guarnerfrancisco reviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT hillcolin reviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion
AT sandersmaryellen reviewofthesystematicreviewprocessanditsapplicabilityforuseinevaluatingevidenceforhealthclaimsonprobioticfoodsintheeuropeanunion