Short-term skin problems in infants aged 0–3 months affect food allergies or atopic dermatitis until 2 years of age, among infants of the general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined whether infants aged 0-3 months exhibited long-term effects of using a moisturizer skincare intervention and whether a short-term skin problem resulted in the subsequent development of food allergies or atopic dermatitis (AD) until the age of 2 years. METHODS: This study was a follow-up of a completed randomized control trial (RCT) of moisturizer skincare for infants aged 0-3 months. A self-reported questionnaire was mailed to the parents of children aged 1-2 years who had participated in the RCT. Data were analyzed using a Chi square test, by intention to treat analysis, and by multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 155 infants, 22 (14.2%) and 28 (18.1%) had food allergies and AD/eczema until 2 years of age, respectively. No significant difference was seen in food allergies or AD between the group that received moisturizer skincare intervention and the control group. On the contrary, food allergies until 2 years of age were significantly associated with short-term (4-7 days) and long-term (more than 7 days) body skin problems occurring in the first 3 months of life, a family history of AD, and the time of starting complementary food. High value of face transepidermal water loss at 3 months of age was also associated with food allergies. Moreover, a short duration of severe diaper dermatitis during the first 3 months, a family history of AD, and being male were significantly associated with AD/eczema until the age of 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: This was a follow-up study conducted 2 years after the completed RCT of a moisturizer skincare intervention for early infants, which was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000013260).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".