A Proposed Framework for an Interdisciplinary Food Allergy Immunotherapy Program for Pediatric Patients Transitioning to Adult Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although established frameworks and guidelines are available to help transition pediatric patients successfully to adult care, patients receiving food allergy immunotherapy have a unique set of needs, and challenges that must be considered. We highlight these considerations for a research-based tertiary care center immunotherapy program. A proposed framework for an interdisciplinary food allergy immunotherapy team that includes not only pediatric allergists and nursing but also adult allergists, dietitians, researchers, and mental health team members working synergistically to address the needs of adolescents and young adults undergoing food allergy immunotherapy as they transition to adult care is presented. Collaborative frameworks such as the one proposed herein present a holistic strategy to transition pediatric patients undergoing food allergy immunotherapy to adult care. Future research activities within this framework will contribute invaluable insights into the broader landscape of food allergy management across the lifespan.
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 | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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".