Systematic review of probiotics for the treatment of community-acquired acute diarrhea in children

BMC Public Health

Table 4 Percent difference and weight contributed by study and continuous outcome

Probiotic microorganism	Study arm by author	Percent difference	% Weight
Diarrhea duration
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG	Canani [13]	-32.0*	10.2
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG	Costa-Ribeiro [14]	-2.1	10.6
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG	Misra [16]	-9.5	18.0
L. bulgaricus & S. thermophilus	Boudraa [12]	-28.5^§	9.6
Saccharomyces boulardii	Canani [13]	-9.1	9.4
Bacillus clausii	Canani [13]	2.2	10.2
Enterococcus faecium	Canani [13]	0.0	9.4
L. bulgaricus, L. acidophilus, Streptococcus thermophilus, B. bifidum	Canani [13]	-39.4*	9.9
L. acidophilus & Bifidobacteria infantis	Lee [15]	-13.9*	8.6
Lactobacillus GG, L. acidophilus, L. casei, L. plantarum, Bifidobacterium infantis	Veereman-Wauters [17]	-7.5	4.0
Stool frequency (day 2)
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG	Canani [13]	-20.0*	12.8
Lactobacillus acidophilus	Rafeey [19]	0.0	8.6
Saccharomyces boulardii	Canani [13]	0.0	11.9
Saccharomyces boulardii	Cetina-Sauri [18]	-14.2^§	14.0
Bacillus clausii	Canani [13]	0.0	12.8
Enterococcus faecium	Canani [13]	0.0	11.9
L. bulgaricus, L. acidophilus, Streptococcus thermophilus, B. bifidum	Canani [13]	-20.0*	12.5
L. acidophilus & Bifidobacteria infantis	Lee [15]	-48.6*	10.8
Lactobacillus GG, L. acidophilus, L. casei, L. plantarum, Bifidobacterium infantis	Veereman-Wauters [17]	-16.7	4.7

Statistically significant differences between groups at the p<0.01 and p<0.05 levels indicated by (*) and (§) respectively for diarrhea duration and stool frequency

ISSN: 1471-2458