MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4248182363 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-51706/v2

Adult-onset IgE-mediated food allergy at a Winnipeg allergy clinic – a case series

2020· preprint· en· W4248182363 on OpenAlexaffabout
Graham Walter, Chrystyna Kalicinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood allergyAllergyMedicineImmunoglobulin EImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background It is a putatively understood phenomenon that the overall prevalence of allergic disease has been increasing in recent decades – particularly in industrialized nations. Despite this, there is a relative scarcity of data concerning the development of food-related allergic disease in the adult population. In addition, the paucity of data as it pertains to the Canadian population is particularly marked when compared to other nations. We sought to determine common culprit foods and the reactions they elicited in a series of 14 patients seen in the Winnipeg allergy and immunology clinic.Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients identified by academic allergists in Winnipeg, Manitoba as fitting criteria for adult-onset IgE-mediated food allergy from May 2018 – July 2020. We included patients with IgE-mediated symptoms, including the pollen-food syndrome which developed at the age of 16 or later. We collected data regarding the food which induced the reaction, what the reaction was, and any concomitant atopic disease.ResultsThe most common culprit food identified was shellfish, followed by finfish, pollen-food syndrome, and wheat/flour. The most common reaction experienced was anaphylaxis, followed by food-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis and isolated (muco)cutaneous symptoms. With regard to concomitant atopic disease, allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis stood out as the most prevalent.Conclusions Adult-onset food allergy – particularly with resultant anaphylaxis – is an important phenomenon to recognize, even when patients have previously tolerated the food in question.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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