Effectiveness of a standardized skin care regimen to prevent atopic dermatitis in infants at risk for atopy: A randomized, pragmatic, parallel‐group study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been proposed that regular emollient application in early life could enhance skin barrier function and prevent atopic dermatitis (AD) especially in predisposed infants. This hypothesis was supported by evidence from exploratory and pilot trials showing protective effects in terms of reduced cumulative atopic dermatitis incidence with the use of daily emollient therapy starting immediately after birth. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness of a standardized skin care regimen for infants on the development of AD compared to not structured skin care regimen in infants with atopic predisposition. METHODS: Prospective, parallel group, randomized, pragmatic, investigator-blinded intervention trial including 160 infants with 52 weeks intervention and 52 weeks follow up phase up to the age of two years. Infants were randomly assigned to receive a standardized skin care regimen including once daily leave-on product application (lipid content 21%) or skin care as preferred by the parents. RESULTS: Using the intention to treat approach, the cumulative AD incidence was 10.6% after one year, and 19.5% after two years in the total sample. There were no statistical significant differences between intervention and control groups. Skin barrier parameters between the intervention and control groups were comparable. AD severity was higher and quality of life was more affected in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Regular emollient application during the first year of life does not prevent the development of atopic dermatitis. A standardized skin care regimen does not delay skin barrier development or causes side effects.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".