MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403796632 · doi:10.1111/all.16366

From bite to brain: Neuro‐immune interactions in food allergy

2024· review· en· W4403796632 on OpenAlexaff
Vikki Houghton, Thomas Eiwegger, Esther Borges Florsheim, Rebecca Knibb, Sandrine Thuret, Alexandra F. Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilKing's College LondonKing's Health PartnersWellcome TrustKing’s College London
KeywordsFood allergyImmune systemAllergyImmunologyImmunoglobulin EDiseaseMedicineAntibodyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies are reported to affect around 3.5% of children and 2.4% of adults, with symptoms varying in range and severity. While being the gold standard for diagnosis, oral food challenges are burdensome, and diagnostic tools based on specific IgE can be flawed. Furthering our understanding of the mechanisms behind food allergy onset, severity and persistence could help reveal immune profiles associated with the disease, to ultimately aid in diagnosis. Alterations to cytokine levels and immune cell ratios have been identified, though further research is needed to fully capture the heterogenous nature of food allergy. Moreover, the existence of such immune alterations also raises the question of potential wider systemic effects. For example, recent research has emphasised the existence and impact of neuro-immune interactions and implicated behavioural and neurological changes associated with food allergy. This review will provide an overview of such food allergy-driven neuro-immune interactions, with the aim of emphasising the importance of furthering our understanding of the immune mechanisms underlying IgE-mediated food allergy.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergySame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207