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

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10045/51308
Información del item - Informació de l'item - Item information
Title: Does the scientific evidence support the advertising claims made for products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis? A systematic review
Authors: Meléndez Illanes, Lorena | González-Díaz, Cristina | Chilet Rosell, Elisa | Álvarez-Dardet, Carlos
Research Group/s: Grupo de Estudios sobre Comunicación Estratégica (E-COM) | Relaciones Públicas y Comunicación Empresarial | Salud Pública
Center, Department or Service: 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
Keywords: Bifidobacterium | Fermented milk products | Lactobacillus casei | Probiotics | Systematic review
Knowledge Area: Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública | Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad
Date Created: 29-Oct-2015
Issue Date: 11-Nov-2015
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Citation: Journal of Public Health. 2015. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdv151
Abstract: 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
Language: eng
Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Rights: © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health
Peer Review: si
Publisher version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdv151
Appears in Collections:INV - SP - Artículos de Revistas
INV - E-COM - Artículos de Revistas
INV - RRPP - Artículos de Revistas
Institucional - IUIEG - Publicaciones

Files in This Item:
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ThumbnailScientificEvidenceAdvertisingClaimsMeléndez.pdfVersión revisada (acceso abierto)183,78 kBAdobe PDFOpen Preview


Items in RUA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.