Precision nutrition in pediatric IBD: A position paper from the ESPGHAN special interest group for basic science and translational research, the IBD Porto group, and allied health professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stratified and precision nutrition refers to disease management or prevention of disease onset, based on dietary interventions tailored to a person's characteristics, biology, gut microbiome, and environmental exposures. Such treatment models may lead to more effective management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and reduce risk of disease development. This societal position paper aimed to report advances made in stratified and precision nutritional therapy in IBD. Following a structured literature search, limited to human studies, we identified four relevant themes: (a) nutritional epidemiology for risk prediction of IBD development, (b) food-based dietary interventions in IBD, (c) exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) for Crohn's disease (CD) management, and (d) pre- and probiotics for IBD management. There is scarce literature upon which we can make recommendations for precision or stratified dietary therapy for IBD, both for risk of disease development and disease management. Certain single-nucleotide polymorphisms related to polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) metabolism may modify the effect dietary PUFA have in increasing the risk of IBD development. Non-colonic CD, mild-to-moderate CD, and high microbiota richness may predict success of EEN and may be used both for prediction of treatment continuation, but also for early cessation in nonresponders. There is currently insufficient evidence to make recommendations for precision or stratified dietary therapy for patients with established IBD. Despite the great interest in stratified and precision nutrition, we currently lack data to support conclusive recommendations. Replication of early findings by independent research groups and within structured clinical interventions is required.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".