The allergic sensitization in infants with atopic eczema from different countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No study has compared allergic sensitization patterns in infants with atopic eczema from different countries. The aim of this study was to investigate the patterns of allergic sensitization in a cohort of infants with atopic eczema participating in a multicentre, international study. METHODS: Two thousand one hundred and eighty-four infants (mean age 17.6 months) with atopic eczema from allergic families were screened in 94 centres in 12 countries to participate in a randomized trial for the early prevention of asthma. Clinical history, Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis Index, measurements for total serum IgE and specific IgE antibodies to eight food and inhalant allergens were entered into a database before randomization to treatment. A history of type of feeding in the first weeks of life and exposure to animals was recorded. RESULTS: A total of 52.9% of the infants had raised total IgE, and 55.5% were sensitized to at least one allergen. There was a wide difference in the total IgE values and in the sensitization rates to foods and aeroallergens among infants from different countries. The highest prevalence rates of allergen-sensitized infants were found in Australia (83%), the UK (79%) and Italy (76%). Infants from Belgium and Poland consistently had the lowest sensitization rates. In each country, a characteristic pattern of sensitization was found for aeroallergens (house dust mite > cat > grass pollen > Alternaria), but not for food allergens. CONCLUSIONS: In infants with atopic eczema, there is a wide variation in the pattern of allergic sensitization between countries, and data from one country are not necessarily generalizable to other countries.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".