Does the scientific evidence support the advertising claims made for products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis? A systematic review

Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/51308
Información del item - Informació de l'item - Item information
Título: Does the scientific evidence support the advertising claims made for products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis? A systematic review
Autor/es: Meléndez Illanes, Lorena | González-Díaz, Cristina | Chilet Rosell, Elisa | Álvarez-Dardet, Carlos
Grupo/s de investigación o GITE: Grupo de Estudios sobre Comunicación Estratégica (E-COM) | Relaciones Públicas y Comunicación Empresarial | Salud Pública
Centro, Departamento o Servicio: Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Comunicación y Psicología Social | Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Enfermería Comunitaria, Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública e Historia de la Ciencia
Palabras clave: Bifidobacterium | Fermented milk products | Lactobacillus casei | Probiotics | Systematic review
Área/s de conocimiento: Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública | Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad
Fecha de creación: 29-oct-2015
Fecha de publicación: 11-nov-2015
Editor: Oxford University Press
Cita bibliográfica: Journal of Public Health. 2015. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdv151
Resumen: Background To analyse the scientific evidence that exists for the advertising claims made for two products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis and to conduct a comparison between the published literature and what is presented in the corporate website. Methods Systematic review, using Medline through Pubmed and Embase. We included human clinical trials that exclusively measured the effect of Lactobacillus casei or Bifidobacterium lactis on a healthy population, and where the objective was related to the health claims made for certain products in advertising. We assessed the levels of evidence and the strength of the recommendation according to the classification criteria established by the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM). We also assessed the outcomes of the studies published on the website that did not appear in the search. Results Of the 440 articles identified, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Only four (25%) of these presented a level of evidence of 1b and a recommendation grade of A, all corresponding to studies on product containing Bifidobacterium lactis, and only 12 of the 16 studies were published on the corporate website (47). Conclusions There is insufficient scientific evidence to support the health claims made for these products, especially in the case of product containing Lactobacillus casei.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/51308
ISSN: 1741-3842 (Print) | 1741-3850 (Online)
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv151
Idioma: eng
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Derechos: © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health
Revisión científica: si
Versión del editor: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdv151
Aparece en las colecciones:INV - SP - Artículos de Revistas
INV - E-COM - Artículos de Revistas
INV - RRPP - Artículos de Revistas
Institucional - IUIEG - Publicaciones

Archivos en este ítem:
Archivos en este ítem:
Archivo Descripción TamañoFormato 
ThumbnailScientificEvidenceAdvertisingClaimsMeléndez.pdfVersión revisada (acceso abierto)183,78 kBAdobe PDFAbrir Vista previa


Todos los documentos en RUA están protegidos por derechos de autor. Algunos derechos reservados.