↓ Skip to main content

Can psychobiotics intake modulate psychological profile and body composition of women affected by normal weight obese syndrome and obesity? A double blind randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
190 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can psychobiotics intake modulate psychological profile and body composition of women affected by normal weight obese syndrome and obesity? A double blind randomized clinical trial
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12967-017-1236-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonino De Lorenzo, Micaela Costacurta, Giuseppe Merra, Paola Gualtieri, Giorgia Cioccoloni, Massimiliano Marchetti, Dimitrios Varvaras, Raffaella Docimo, Laura Di Renzo

Abstract

Evidence of probiotics effects on gut function, brain activity and emotional behaviour were provided. Probiotics can have dramatic effects on behaviour through the microbiome-gut-brain axis, through vagus nerve. We investigated whether chronic probiotic intake could modulate psychological state, eating behaviour and body composition of normal weight obese (NWO) and preobese-obese (PreOB/OB) compared to normal weight lean women (NWL). 60 women were enrolled. At baseline and after a 3-week probiotic oral suspension (POS) intake, all subjects underwent evaluation of body composition by anthropometry and dual X-ray absorptiometry, and psychological profile assessment by self-report questionnaires (i.e. EDI-2, SCL90R and BUT). Statistical analysis was carried out using paired t test or a non-parametric Wilcoxon test to evaluate differences between baseline and after POS intake, one-way ANOVA to compare all three groups and, where applicable, Chi square or t test were used to assess symptoms. Of the 48 women that concluded the study, 24% were NWO, 26% were NWL and 50% were PreOB/OB. Significant differences in body composition were highlighted among groups both at baseline and after a POS (p < 0.05). After POS intake, a significant reduction of BMI, resistance, FM (kg and %) (p < 0.05), and a significant increase of FFM (kg and  %) (p < 0.05) were observed in all subjects in NOW and PreOB/OB. After POS intake, reduction of bacterial overgrowth syndrome (p < 0.05) and lower psychopathological scores (p < 0.05) were observed in NWO and PreOB/OB women. At baseline and after POS intake, all subjects tested were negative to SCL90R_GSI scale, but after treatment subjects positive to BUT_GSI scale were significantly reduced (8.33%) (p < 0.05) compared to the baseline (33.30%). In NWO and PreOB/OB groups significant differences (p < 0.05) in response to the subscales of the EDI-2 were observed. Significant improvement of the orocecal transit time was observed (p < 0.05) after POS intake. Furthermore, significant differences were observed for meteorism (p < 0.05) and defecation frequency (p < 0.05). A 3-week intake of selected psychobiotics modulated body composition, bacterial contamination, psychopathological scores of NWO and PreOB/OB women. Further research is needed on a larger population and for a longer period of treatment before definitive conclusions can be made. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Id: NCT01890070.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 190 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 17%
Student > Master 32 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Researcher 11 6%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 57 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Psychology 8 4%
Other 34 18%
Unknown 66 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,559,889
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#730
of 4,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,895
of 317,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#13
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,056 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.