Title |
An Australian Consensus on Infant Feeding Guidelines to Prevent Food Allergy: Outcomes From the Australian Infant Feeding Summit
|
---|---|
Published in |
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, May 2017
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.jaip.2017.03.013 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Merryn J. Netting, Dianne E. Campbell, Jennifer J. Koplin, Kathy M. Beck, Vicki McWilliam, Shyamali C. Dharmage, Mimi L.K. Tang, Anne-Louise Ponsonby, Susan L. Prescott, Sandra Vale, Richard K.S. Loh, Maria Makrides, Katrina J. Allen, the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy Centre for Food and Allergy Research |
Abstract |
Infant feeding in the first postnatal year of life has an important role in an infant's risk of developing food allergy. Consumer infant feeding advice is diverse and lacks consistency. The Australian Infant Feeding Summit was held with the aim of achieving national consensus on the wording of guidelines for infant feeding and allergy prevention. Two meetings were hosted by the Centre for Food and Allergy Research, the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, and the Australian National Allergy Strategy. The first meeting of 30 allergy researchers, clinicians, and consumers assessed the evidence. The second consensus meeting involved 46 expert stakeholders including state and federal health care agencies, consumers, and experts in allergy, infant feeding, and population health. Partner stakeholders agreed on consensus wording for infant feeding advice: CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was achieved in a context in which there is a high prevalence of food allergy. Guidelines for other countries are being updated. Provision of consistent wording related to infant feeding to reduce food allergy risk will ensure clear consumer advice. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 20 | 10% |
Mexico | 12 | 6% |
Australia | 11 | 5% |
Canada | 10 | 5% |
United States | 10 | 5% |
United Kingdom | 7 | 3% |
Chile | 6 | 3% |
India | 6 | 3% |
Ireland | 4 | 2% |
Other | 25 | 12% |
Unknown | 94 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 152 | 74% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 36 | 18% |
Scientists | 17 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 129 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 10% |
Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
Student > Master | 9 | 7% |
Other | 8 | 6% |
Researcher | 8 | 6% |
Other | 29 | 22% |
Unknown | 52 | 40% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 19% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 16% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 7% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
Engineering | 3 | 2% |
Other | 16 | 12% |
Unknown | 52 | 40% |