Nutritional Considerations of Plant‐Based Diets for People With Food Allergy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant-based diets (PBD) have been reported throughout history, but are increasingly common in current times, likely in part due to considerable emphasis on climate change and human health and wellness. Many dietary organisations around the world endorse well-planned, nutritionally adequate PBD, which exclude some or all forms of animal-based foods. However, special attention must be given to patients who follow PBD and also have food allergy (FA), as avoidance may increase the risk of developing nutritional deficiencies, including poor growth in children, weight loss in adults and vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Given the increasing prevalence of both PBD and food allergen avoidance diets, healthcare providers are likely to counsel patients with FA who also follow a PBD. In this review, an overview of PBD in patients with FA is provided, including recent trends, macro- and micronutrient needs, and growth for children and weight gain considerations for adults. With regard to a PBD, special attention should be given to ensure adequate fat and protein intake and improving the bioavailability of several minerals such as iron, zinc, iodine, calcium and magnesium, and vitamins such as A, B2, B12 and D. Although the collective data on growth amongst children following a PBD are varied in outcome and may be influenced in part by the type of PBD, growth must be regularly monitored and in adults weight gain assessed as part of any clinical assessment in those people with FA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".