MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2902118293 · doi:10.1542/peds.2018-2420qq

Reduced Risk of Peanut Sensitization Following Exposure Through Breastfeeding and Early Peanut Introduction

2018· article· en· W2902118293 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Dantzer, Robert A. Wood

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreastfeedingAsthmaPeanut allergyPediatricsIncidence (geometry)SensitizationPregnancyAllergyFood allergyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To evaluate the relationship between maternal consumption of peanut while breastfeeding, the timing of direct oral peanut introduction, and sensitization to peanut at 7 years of age.The study included 342 children from the Canadian Childhood Asthma Primary Prevention Study who had a family history of asthma or immunoglobulin E–mediated allergic disease.A secondary analysis of the Canadian Childhood Asthma Primary Prevention Study cohort was performed. Pregnant women were recruited and randomly assigned to a multifaceted intervention group or a control group. The control group received no specific maternal or infant diet instructions. Mothers in the intervention group were asked to do the following: (1) avoid peanuts, nuts, fish, and eggs during pregnancy and while breastfeeding; (2) breastfeed for 4 to 12 months; (3) avoid introducing solid foods to infants until after 6 months of age; and (4) delay the introduction of allergenic foods until at least 12 months of age. Maternal and infant diet questionnaires were completed at 2 weeks and 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months of age. At 7 years of age, children had skin prick testing to peanut performed.Of 342 children, 32 (9.4%) were sensitized to peanut by 7 years of age, with no significant difference seen between study groups. The lowest incidence of peanut sensitization (1.7%) was found when mothers consumed peanut while breastfeeding and infants were introduced to peanuts in their diet before 12 months of age; an interaction analysis was used to confirm that this combination was protective. Isolated exposure to maternal peanut consumption while breastfeeding or infant peanut introduction before 12 months of age was associated with an increased risk of peanut sensitization (adjusted odds ratio 12.45 [95% confidence interval 1.18–131.30] and adjusted odds ratio 8.30 [95% confidence interval 1.05–65.80], respectively).We found that peanut introduction before 12 months of age combined with maternal peanut consumption while breastfeeding was associated with the lowest risk of peanut sensitization by 7 years of age compared with maternal or infant peanut consumption in isolation.The Learning Early About Peanut Allergy study revealed that in high-risk infants, early peanut introduction reduced the risk of peanut allergy. The impact of maternal peanut consumption during pregnancy or while breastfeeding remains unclear. This study revealed that the group with maternal peanut consumption while breastfeeding, combined with early peanut introduction to the infant, yielded a reduced risk of peanut sensitization at 7 years of age. However, researchers also found that early peanut consumption alone led to a marked increase in peanut sensitization, which would appear contradictory to the Learning Early About Peanut Allergy study. This study has several limitations, including sample size, incomplete and limited dietary information, and a lack of oral food challenges used to diagnose peanut allergy. Furthermore, research is clearly needed before suggesting any changes to our current recommendations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICS→Same topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research→French-language works237,207→