Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

5 questions · 5 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 2 · 40%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 60%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Prebiotic vs probiotic

Clinical improvement · people in remission or with mildly activeulcerative colitis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prebiotics for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Prebiotic vs synbiotics

Clinical improvement · people in remission or with mildly activeulcerative colitis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Prebiotics for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Prebiotic vs placebo

Clinical improvement (partial Mayo score) (60 days) · people with histologically confirmed diagnosis of ulcerative colitis in remission

1 finding from 1 review

Prebiotics for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 30 participants
Very low

Prebiotic vs placebo

Clinical improvement (Rachmilewitz index) (14 days) · people with mild‐to‐moderate disease (Rachmilewitz index) or active disease (SCCAI score of 4 to 10)

1 finding from 1 review

Prebiotics for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 15 participants
Very low

Prebiotics and anti‐inflammatory therapy vs anti‐inflammatory therapy

Clinical improvement (Lichtiger index) (4 weeks) · Patients with active mild to moderate ulcerative colitis

1 finding from 1 review

Prebiotics for induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 18 participants
Very low