MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413100043 · doi:10.1080/03007995.2025.2544596

Patient preferences for food allergy treatments in the United States: a discrete choice experiment

2025· article· en· W4413100043 on OpenAlexaff
A. Mickle, Christopher Warren, Arpamas Seetasith, Karissa Johnston, J W Dunne, Stacey Kowal, Andrea Bever, Stella Ko, Vincent Garmo, Sachin Gupta, Andrew Lloyd, Christina E. Ciaccio

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health
FundersGenentechNational Institutes of HealthFood Allergy Research and Education
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalOdds ratioFood allergyAllergyLogistic regressionRelative riskAnaphylaxisOddsDemographyInternal medicinePediatricsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To estimate preferences of adolescents and caregivers of children with food allergies (FA) for food allergy for attributes for treatments intended to prevent exposure-induced severe reactions and to examine how these vary by clinical and demographic factors.Methods A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted between May and June 2024 among US-resident individuals, aged 13–17 years or caregivers of a child with FA aged ≤12 years, self-reporting physician-diagnosed FA. The survey comprised treatment-attribute focused DCE choice sets; the Intolerance of Uncertainty-12 Scale (IUS-12); the Food Allergy Independent Measure (FAIM); and clinical/demographic questions. Conditional logistic regression analyses were conducted overall and among subgroups and presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Relative importance of attributes was also calculated.Results Participants were adolescents (n = 73, mean age 15.9 years) and caregivers (n = 228, mean age 37.1 years). Overall, treatment attributes associated with statistically significant odds for preferring a treatment included a 95% relative reduction in moderate-to-severe allergic reaction risk versus no reduction (p < 0.001); oral administration over subcutaneous (p < 0.001); administration in a home versus clinical setting (p < 0.05); less frequent versus daily administration (every two weeks: p < 0.001; every four weeks: p < 0.001). Respondents were disinclined to prefer treatment attributes when the risk of gastrointestinal symptoms (p < 0.001) or anaphylaxis (p < 0.001) increased. Efficacy (75% decrease in relative risk of a moderate-to-severe allergic reaction) was the top ranked attribute [OR = 1.61 (1.49, 1.75)].Conclusion Overall, respondents indicated significant preferences for more efficacious, safer, and convenient (oral, at-home, and less frequent) treatments. Treatment efficacy was the most highly ranked treatment feature.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207