Exposure to Toxocara spp. and Ascaris lumbricoides infections and risk of allergic rhinitis in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Substantial experimental studies suggest a role for helminthes infections in the pathogenesis of allergies, but epidemiologic data have been inconsistent. Unlike to asthma, the association between helminthes infection and allergic rhinitis (AR) has been poorly studied. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the association between exposure to Ascaris and Toxocara infections and AR. Methods We did an age- and gender-matched case–control study of 81 children with physician-confirmed AR and 101 control subjects in a referral hospital for pediatric diseases in northern Iran. Exposure to Ascaris and Toxocara infections was evaluated by anti-A. lumbricoides- and anti-Toxocara- IgG antibodies using a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Associations were determined using multivariate logistic regression. Results Ascaris seropositivity was higher in children with rhinitis than in controls (12.34 vs. 3.96%). Ascaris seropositivity was positively associated with AR in univariate analysis (OR, 3.42; 95% CI 1.03–11.3; P value = 0.035), but this association was not significant after adjustment for potential confounders (OR, 1.85; 95% CI 0.42–8.18). Also Toxocara seropositivity was higher in children with AR than in healthy subjects (3.7% vs. 0.99), indicating non-significant association with AR in both univariate (OR, 3.84; 95% CI 0.39–37.7) and multivariate analyses (OR, 0.8; 95% CI 0.04–15.44). Conclusion Our results revealed that AR is not associated with seropositivity to Ascaris and Toxocara infections in general; however, a higher seropositivity rate was found for both parasites in children with AR. More studies with longitudinal design and larger sample size are needed to elucidate this association.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".