MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040994057 · doi:10.4236/fns.2015.61004

Prevalence of Peanut Allergy in Offspring of Peanut Farmers

2015· article· en· W2040994057 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Jagdis, Gary M. Liss, Soheila J. Maleki, Peter Vadas

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Nutrition Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Peanut Board
KeywordsPeanut allergyOffspringAllergyMedicineFood allergyIngestionPopulationBiotechnologyBiologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineImmunologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: While exposure to environmental peanut during infancy appears to promote sensitization by the epicutaneous route, early and frequent peanut ingestion during infancy may prevent peanut allergy through oral tolerance. Due to parental occupation, the offspring of peanut farmers are likely exposed to peanut protein in their environment, but they may also have early introduction into their diet due to ready access. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of peanut allergy in offspring of peanut farmers. Methods: A survey was mailed by the National Peanut Board to peanut farmers in the United States collecting information on peanut consumption, peanut reactions, physician-confirmed peanut allergy (PA), epinephrine auto-injector prescription and history of other allergies in offspring. Egg allergy (EA) served as a comparator to peanut allergy. Results: Of 10,349 households surveyed, 1050 responses were received (2493 offspring, participation rate 10%). The self-reported prevalence of peanut allergy in the general population in the USA is 0.9%, 1.3%, and 0.7% for children 0 - 5 years, 6 - 10 years, and 11 - 17 years, respectively. In offspring of peanut farmers, PA vs EA was reported in 3.69% (10/271) vs 2.6% (7/271), 2.8% (14/493) vs 2.0% (10/493), and 1.48% (37/2493) vs 1.4% (35/2493) of offspring ≤10 years, offspring ≤15 years and all offspring, respectively. Physician-confirmed PA was reported in 3.3% (9/271), 2.6% (13/493), and 1.24% (31/2493) in the three groups, respectively. Physician-confirmed PA with epinephrine auto-injector prescription was reported in1.8% (5/271), 1.8% (9/493), and 0.68% (17/2493) in the three groups, respectively. Conclusions: We found that the self-reported prevalence of peanut allergy in offspring of peanut farmers was similar to that reported in the general population. This is a unique population that may provide insight into factors that influence development of peanut allergy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood and Nutrition SciencesSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207