Maternal dietary antigen avoidance during pregnancy or lactation, or both, for preventing or treating atopic disease in the child
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Some breastfed infants with atopic eczema benefit from elimination of cow milk, egg, or other antigens from their mother's diet. Maternal dietary antigens are also known to cross the placenta. Objectives To assess the effects of prescribing an antigen avoidance diet during pregnancy or lactation, or both, on maternal and infant nutrition and on the prevention or treatment of atopic disease in the child. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (6 July 2012). Selection criteria All randomized or quasi‐randomized comparisons of maternal dietary antigen avoidance prescribed to pregnant or lactating women. We excluded trials of multimodal interventions that included manipulation of the infant's diet other than breast milk or of non‐dietary aspects of the infant's environment. Data collection and analysis We extracted data from published reports, supplemented by additional information received from the trialists we contacted. Main results The evidence from five trials, involving 952 participants, does not suggest a protective effect of maternal dietary antigen avoidance during pregnancy on the incidence of atopic eczema during the first 18 months of life. Data on allergic rhinitis or conjunctivitis, or both, and urticaria are limited to a single trial each and are insufficient to draw meaningful inferences. Longer‐term atopic outcomes have not been reported. The restricted diet during pregnancy was associated with a slightly but statistically significantly lower mean gestational weight gain, a non‐significantly higher risk of preterm birth, and a non‐significant reduction in mean birthweight. The evidence from two trials, involving 523 participants, did not observe a significant protective effect of maternal antigen avoidance during lactation on the incidence of atopic eczema during the first 18 months or on positive skin‐prick tests to cow milk, egg, or peanut antigen at one, two, or seven years. One crossover trial involving 17 lactating mothers of infants with established atopic eczema found that maternal dietary antigen avoidance was associated with a non‐significant reduction in eczema severity. Authors' conclusions Prescription of an antigen avoidance diet to a high‐risk woman during pregnancy is unlikely to reduce substantially her child's risk of atopic diseases, and such a diet may adversely affect maternal or fetal nutrition, or both. Prescription of an antigen avoidance diet to a high‐risk woman during lactation may reduce her child's risk of developing atopic eczema, but better trials are needed. Dietary antigen avoidance by lactating mothers of infants with atopic eczema may reduce the severity of the eczema, but larger trials are needed. Plain Language Summary Maternal dietary antigen avoidance during pregnancy or lactation, or both, for preventing or treating atopic disease in the child Evidence is inadequate to advise women to avoid specific foods during pregnancy or breastfeeding to protect their children from allergic diseases like eczema and asthma. We included five trials, involving 952 participants. Trials of mothers' avoidance of milk, eggs, and other potentially 'antigenic' foods during pregnancy or breastfeeding, or both, provide inadequate evidence about whether such avoidance helps prevent atopic eczema or asthma in the child. Women who avoided eating these foods gained significantly less weight during pregnancy in the one trial reporting on this outcome, raising the possibility of adverse nutritional effects on the mother or fetus. Finally, one small trial reported an inconclusive response of breastfed infants with atopic eczema when their mothers avoided consumption of cow milk and egg.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".