Diet Diversity and Feeding Practices in Toddlers With and Without Food Allergy – A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate diet diversity and feeding practices in toddlers with food allergy (FA) compared to healthy peers. Methods: This cross-sectional survey was conducted in Polish nurseries and included children aged 13-36 months with and without FA. Parents completed a questionnaire assessing feeding practices, anthropometric measurements, diet diversity using the Food Frequency Questionnaire and feeding difficulties using the Montreal Children’s Hospital Feeding Scale. Results: Data from 388 children (predominantly from Warsaw and from families with good socioeconomic status) were analyzed. Among them, 61 had FA confirmed by a physician (however an oral food challenge was performed only in one-third of cases). The proportion of children with underweight (≤3 percentile) was similar between the FA and non-FA groups (3.4 versus 0.9%, respectively). Compared with the non-FA group children with FA had significantly lower median overall diet diversity, food group diversity (≥ 9 food groups), food item diversity, and mean food allergen diversity. The WHO Minimum Dietary Diversity and fruit/vegetable diversity were similar in both groups. We found no difference in the proportion of children with feeding difficulties between the FA and non-FA groups (median = 18 versus 13.5%). Although a lower proportion of children with FA had introduced cow’s milk, hen’s egg, tree nuts, nuts and sesame compared with the non-FA group, only a minority had confirmed allergies to nuts, peanuts and sesame. Conclusions: Children aged 13-36 months with FA are at risk of reduced overall diet diversity and over-restriction of potentially allergenic foods.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".