Loss of appetite

Compared within 1 study that had both: 50 people with loss of appetite and 50 healthy people. 39 microbes are less common in people with loss of appetite, and none more common.

A difference is an association: it doesn’t mean these microbes cause, prevent or treat loss of appetite.

Phylum

Searching opens both lists and shows only matching rows.

Less common in loss of appetite · 39

Strongest first, then the biggest gap · Each figure is 10 people Strongest first · Each figure is 10 people
  1. Intestinibacter bartlettii in 1 study Healthy 90% loss of appetite 34%
  2. Segatella hominis in 1 study Healthy 28% loss of appetite 0%
  3. Phocaeicola dorei in 1 study Healthy 68% loss of appetite 18%
  4. Bacteroides uniformis in 1 study Healthy 96% loss of appetite 58%
  5. Anaerobutyricum soehngenii in 1 study Healthy 46% loss of appetite 6.0%

More common in loss of appetite · 0

Strongest first, then the biggest gap · Each figure is 10 people Strongest first · Each figure is 10 people

None compared.

Where these numbers come from

Studies
Only GMrepo projects that had people with the condition and healthy people, 10 or more of each. Numbers come from those studies, never from pooling.Sampled in China.
How common
The share of people whose sample has any of it, in the people with the condition and in the healthy people of those same studies. Tested within studies (Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel, corrected for testing many microbes); a difference counts when it is clear and meaningful (Cohen’s h of 0.2 or more).
Strength word
Counted by code from how many studies point the same way: Seen again and again (3 or more, none clearly the other way), Seen more than once (2, the majority), Seen once (1, listed last). Where studies disagree, a row isn’t listed.
Each study
Tap a row for every study’s own numbers, and for how much carriers have.
Analysis
Our analysis of GMrepo data. GMrepo on Data sources · Read the rules

Also compared · 201 microbes

Compared within studies that had both, but not listed above.

No meaningful difference · 201

PubMed · human studies and reviews first

Recent research

All research on it
  1. PubMed ↗
  2. PubMed ↗
  3. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    CD8 T cells drive anorexia, dysbiosis, and blooms of a commensal with immunosuppressive potential after viral infection.
    PubMed ↗
  4. PubMed ↗

Source: PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine · 4 linked papers, last 10 years