Nutritional status and feeding difficulties in children up to 2 years of age with cow's milk allergy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: To assess the nutritional status and incidence of feeding difficulties in Polish children up to 2 years of age with cow's milk allergy (CMA) on cow's milk proteins-free diet. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-center study included children aged 6 months to 2 years with confirmed or suspected (without oral food challenge) diagnosis of CMA on the elimination diet for at least 1 month. The primary outcomes were an assessment of proportion of children with impaired nutritional status (with the weight for length and body mass index (BMI) z-score > 1 and <-1), and feeding difficulties according to the Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale. Children with confirmed and suspected CMA were assessed separately. RESULTS: A 144 children with confirmed CMA and 88 with suspected CMA were included (57 and 78% with multiple food allergies, respectively). Among children with confirmed CMA, one-third (35.5%) of participants had any nutritional status impairment regardless of definition. Among those, most of children had mild malnutrition (10.4 vs. 9%) and possible risk of overweight (11.1 vs. 9.7%; following respectively BMI for age and weight for length z-scores). Only 16.0% of children had feeding difficulties. Feeding difficulties was identified to be a risk factor for moderate malnutrition compared to children without feeding difficulties (odds ratio 10, 95% confidence interval: 4-27). CONCLUSIONS: Mild malnutrition and possible risk of overweight are concern in children up to 2 years of age on cow's milk proteins-free diet. Feeding difficulties are less common, however, may affect the nutritional status.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".