MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032008401 · doi:10.1017/jns.2014.61

The effect of long-term feeding of skin barrier-fortified diets on the owner-assessed incidence of atopic dermatitis symptoms in Labrador retrievers

2015· article· en· W2032008401 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frank Looringh van Beeck, Adrian Watson, Margriet Bos, Vincent Biourge, Ton Willemse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutritional Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoyal CaninUniversiteit UtrechtUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisMedicineIncidence (geometry)AtopyImmunoglobulin EAllergyDermatologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the effect of feeding a skin barrier function-augmenting diet early in dogs' lives on the appearance of clinical signs associated with canine atopic dermatitis. Pregnant bitches (starting 5 weeks after mating) and their subsequent litters (up to 1 year of age) were fed either supplemented or unsupplemented diets. Nutrients supplemented were nicotinamide, pantothenate, histidine, inositol and choline. Circulating IgE levels to dust mute allergens Der f and Der p were measured when the puppies were 6 and 12 months old. Two owner questionnaires were used to assess the occurrence of typical signs associated with atopic dermatitis when dogs were between the ages of 22 and 36, and 34 and 48 months. Using linear mixed models we observed higher levels of circulating anti-Der f (P = 0·021) and -Der p IgE (P = 0·01) during the first year in the dogs fed the unsupplemented than in those fed the supplemented diet. The owner-assessed incidence of atopic dermatitis signs amongst the dogs was significantly greater in the unsupplemented group at the time of the second follow-up questionnaire (10/33 dogs v. 2/24 dogs). These outcomes suggest that a nutritionally derived improvement to barrier function early in life may reduce the frequency of signs associated with atopic dermatitis. The effect is possibly the result of making the epidermis, now thought to be a major route of environmental allergen exposure, more resistant to penetration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nutritional ScienceSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207