MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914243730 · doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12426

A Comprehensive Review on Kiwifruit Allergy: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Management, and Potential Modification of Allergens Through Processing

2019· review· en· W2914243730 on OpenAlexafffund
Jin Wang, Sai Kranthi Vanga, Christine McCusker, Vijaya Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueComprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsAllergyFood allergyAnaphylaxisMedicineFood scienceBiologyBiotechnologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kiwifruit is rich in bioactive components including dietary fibers, carbohydrates, natural sugars, vitamins, minerals, omega-3 fatty acids, and antioxidants. These components are beneficial to boost the human immune system and prevent cancer and heart diseases. However, kiwifruit is emerging as one of the most common elicitors of food allergies worldwide. Kiwifruit allergy results from an abnormal immune response to kiwifruit proteins and occur after consuming this fruit. Symptoms range from the oral allergy syndrome (OAS) to the life-threatening anaphylaxis. Thirteen different allergens have been identified in green kiwifruit and, among these allergens, Act d 1, Act d 2, Act d 8, Act d 11, and Act d 12 are defined as the "major allergens." Act d 1 and Act d 2 are ripening-related allergens and are found in abundance in fully ripe kiwifruit. Structures of several kiwifruit allergens may be altered under high temperatures or strong acidic conditions. This review discusses the pathogenesis, clinical features, and diagnosis of kiwifruit allergy and evaluates food processing methods including thermal, ultrasound, and chemical processing which may be used to reduce the allergenicity of kiwifruit. Management and medical treatments for kiwifruit allergy are also summarized.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food SafetySame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207