Atopy, home environment and the risk of childhood-onset type 1 diabetes: a population-based case–control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The marked increases in the incidence of type 1 diabetes in recent decades strongly suggest the role of environmental influences. These environmental influences remain largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate atopy and home environment (such as children living at home, sharing a bedroom and house moves) as potential risk factors for type 1 diabetes. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: In Northern Ireland, 175 children with type 1 diabetes and 4859 control children completed a questionnaire on atopy experience, family composition and home environment. Control children from two age groups (6-8 yr old and 13-14 yr old) were identified from randomly selected primary and secondary schools across Northern Ireland. Cases were identified from a population-based type 1 diabetes register. RESULTS: There was little evidence of a difference in the proportion of participants with a history of atopy in the cases compared with controls. There was a significant reduction in the risk of diabetes in children who lived with more siblings {odds ratio (OR) = 0.58 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.39-0.85] in children who lived with three or more siblings compared with one or none} and in children who moved house more often [OR = 0.59 (95% CI 0.40-0.88) in children who moved house twice or more compared with never]. CONCLUSION: The reduced risk of type 1 diabetes in children living with siblings, sharing a bedroom and moving house more often could reflect the protection afforded by exposure to infections in early life and consequently may provide support for the hygiene hypothesis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".