↓ Skip to main content

Polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in infancy for the prevention of allergy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in infancy for the prevention of allergy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010112.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim Schindler, John KH Sinn, David A Osborn

Abstract

Early dietary intakes may influence the development of allergic disease. It is important to determine if dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) given as supplements or added to infant formula prevent the development of allergy. To determine the effect of higher PUFA intake during infancy to prevent allergic disease. We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 14 September 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 14 September 2015) and CINAHL (1982 to 14 September 2015). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials. Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared the use of a PUFA with no PUFA in infants for the prevention of allergy. Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data from the included studies. We used fixed-effect analyses. The treatment effects were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence. The search found 17 studies that assessed the effect of higher versus lower intake of PUFAs on allergic outcomes in infants. Only nine studies enrolling 2704 infants reported allergy outcomes that could be used in meta-analyses. Of these, there were methodological concerns for eight.In infants up to two years of age, meta-analyses found no difference in incidence of all allergy (1 study, 323 infants; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.26; risk difference (RD) -0.02, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.09; heterogeneity not applicable), asthma (3 studies, 1162 infants; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.35, I(2) = 0%; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05, I(2) = 0%), dermatitis/eczema (7 studies, 1906 infants; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.06, I(2) = 0%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02, I(2) = 0%) or food allergy (3 studies, 915 infants; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.19, I(2) = 63%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02, I(2) = 74%). There was a reduction in allergic rhinitis (2 studies, 594 infants; RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.96, I(2) = 6%; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.00, I(2) = 54%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 25, 95% CI 13 to ∞).In children aged two to five years, meta-analysis found no difference in incidence of all allergic disease (2 studies, 154 infants; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.02, I(2) = 43%; RD -0.16, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.00, I(2) = 63%; NNTB 6, 95% CI 3 to ∞), asthma (1 study, 89 infants; RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.02; RD -0.20, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.02; heterogeneity not applicable; NNTB 5, 95% CI 3 to 50), dermatitis/eczema (2 studies, 154 infants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.24, I(2) = 0%; RD -0.09 95% CI -0.22 to 0.04, I(2) = 24%) or food allergy (1 study, 65 infants; RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.25 to 20.68; RD 0.05, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.16; heterogeneity not applicable).In children aged two to five years, meta-analysis found no difference in prevalence of all allergic disease (2 studies, 633 infants; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.19, I(2) = 36%; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07, I(2) = 0%), asthma (2 studies, 635 infants; RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.53, I(2) = 0%; RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.09, I(2) = 0%), dermatitis/eczema (2 studies, 635 infants; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.09, I(2) = 0%; RD -0.04 95% CI -0.11 to 0.02, I(2) = 0%), allergic rhinitis (2 studies, 635 infants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.25, I(2) = 0%; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.08, I(2) = 0%) or food allergy (1 study, 119 infants; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.19; RD -0.10, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.00; heterogeneity not applicable; NNTB 10, 95% CI 5 to ∞). There is no evidence that PUFA supplementation in infancy has an effect on infant or childhood allergy, asthma, dermatitis/eczema or food allergy. However, the quality of evidence was very low. There was insufficient evidence to determine an effect on allergic rhinitis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 112 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 19 17%
Student > Master 19 17%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 35 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 40%
Unspecified 23 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 20 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#841,027
of 13,190,464 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,687
of 10,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,194
of 287,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#56
of 167 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,190,464 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,519 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,055 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 167 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.