Timing of food introduction and development of food sensitization in a prospective birth cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effect of infant feeding practices on the development of food allergy remains controversial. We examined the relationship between timing and patterns of food introduction and sensitization to foods at age 1 year in the Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development (CHILD) birth cohort study. METHODS: Nutrition questionnaire data prospectively collected at age 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months were used to determine timing of introduction of cow's milk products, egg, and peanut. At age 1 year, infants underwent skin prick testing to cow's milk, egg white, and peanut. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess the impact of timing of food exposures on sensitization outcomes, and latent class analysis was used to study patterns of food introduction within the cohort. RESULTS: Among 2124 children with sufficient data, delaying introduction of cow's milk products, egg, and peanut beyond the first year of life significantly increased the odds of sensitization to that food (cow's milk adjOR 3.69, 95% CI 1.37-9.08; egg adjOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.25-2.80; peanut adjOR 1.76, 95% CI 1.07-3.01). Latent class analysis produced a three-class model: early, usual, and delayed introduction. A pattern of delayed introduction, characterized by avoidance of egg and peanut during the first year of life, increased the odds of sensitization to any of the three tested foods (adjOR 1.78, 95% CI 1.26-2.49). CONCLUSIONS: Avoidance of potentially allergenic foods during the first year of life significantly increased the odds of sensitization to the corresponding foods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".