Skip header and navigation

Refine By

5 records – page 1 of 1.

Overall prevalence of self-reported food allergy in Canada.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature121901
Source
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2012 Oct;130(4):986-8
Publication Type
Article
Date
Oct-2012

A population-based study on peanut, tree nut, fish, shellfish, and sesame allergy prevalence in Canada.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature143708
Source
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010 Jun;125(6):1327-35
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2010
Author
Moshe Ben-Shoshan
Daniel W Harrington
Lianne Soller
Joseph Fragapane
Lawrence Joseph
Yvan St Pierre
Samuel B Godefroy
Susan J Elliott
Susan J Elliot
Ann E Clarke
Author Affiliation
Division of Pediatric Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Pediatrics, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. daliamoshebs@gmail.com
Source
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010 Jun;125(6):1327-35
Date
Jun-2010
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Animals
Arachis hypogaea - immunology
Canada
Child
Fishes - immunology
Food Hypersensitivity - diagnosis - epidemiology - immunology
Humans
Interviews as Topic
Nut Hypersensitivity - diagnosis - epidemiology - immunology
Population
Prevalence
Sesamum - immunology
Shellfish - adverse effects
Skin Tests
Abstract
Recent studies suggest an increased prevalence of food-induced allergy and an increased incidence of food-related anaphylaxis. However, prevalence estimates of food allergies vary considerably between studies.
To determine the prevalence of peanut, tree nut, fish, shellfish, and sesame allergy in Canada.
Using comparable methodology to Sicherer et al in the United States in 2002, we performed a cross-Canada, random telephone survey. Food allergy was defined as perceived (based on self-report), probable (based on convincing history or self-report of physician diagnosis), or confirmed (based on history and evidence of confirmatory tests).
Of 10,596 households surveyed in 2008 and 2009, 3666 responded (34.6% participation rate), of which 3613 completed the entire interview, representing 9667 individuals. The prevalence of perceived peanut allergy was 1.00% (95% CI, 0.80%-1.20%); tree nut, 1.22% (95% CI, 1.00%-1.44%); fish, 0.51% (95% CI, 0.37%-0.65%); shellfish, 1.60% (95% CI, 1.35%-1.86%); and sesame, 0.10% (95% CI, 0.04%-0.17%). The prevalence of probable allergy was 0.93% (95% CI, 0.74%-1.12%); 1.14% (95% CI, 0.92%-1.35%); 0.48% (95% CI, 0.34%-0.61%); 1.42% (95% CI, 1.18%-1.66%); and 0.09% (95% CI, 0.03%-0.15%), respectively. Because of the infrequency of confirmatory tests and the difficulty in obtaining results if performed, the prevalence of confirmed allergy was much lower.
This is the first nationwide Canadian study to determine the prevalence of severe food allergies. Our results indicate disparities between perceived and confirmed food allergy that might contribute to the wide range of published prevalence estimates.
Notes
Erratum In: J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2011 Mar;127(3):840Elliot, Susan J [corrected to Elliott, Susan J]
PubMed ID
20451985 View in PubMed
Less detail

The use of incentives in vulnerable populations for a telephone survey: a randomized controlled trial.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature119644
Source
BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:572
Publication Type
Article
Date
2012
Author
Megan Knoll
Lianne Soller
Moshe Ben-Shoshan
Daniel Harrington
Joey Fragapane
Lawrence Joseph
Sebastien La Vieille
Yvan St-Pierre
Kathi Wilson
Susan Elliott
Ann Clarke
Author Affiliation
Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada. megan.knoll@mail.mcgill.ca
Source
BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:572
Date
2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Canada - epidemiology
Food Hypersensitivity - epidemiology
Health Surveys
Humans
Motivation
Prevalence
Vulnerable Populations
Abstract
Poor response rates in prevalence surveys can lead to nonresponse bias thereby compromising the validity of prevalence estimates. We conducted a telephone survey of randomly selected households to estimate the prevalence of food allergy in the 10 Canadian provinces between May 2008 and March 2009 (the SCAAALAR study: Surveying Canadians to Assess the Prevalence of Common Food Allergies and Attitudes towards Food LAbeling and Risk). A household response rate of only 34.6% was attained, and those of lower socioeconomic status, lower education and new Canadians were underrepresented. We are now attempting to target these vulnerable populations in the SPAACE study (Surveying the Prevalence of Food Allergy in All Canadian Environments) and are evaluating strategies to increase the response rate. Although the success of incentives to increase response rates has been demonstrated previously, no studies have specifically examined the use of unconditional incentives in these vulnerable populations in a telephone survey. The pilot study will compare response rates between vulnerable Canadian populations receiving and not receiving an incentive.
Randomly selected households were randomly assigned to receive either a $5 incentive or no incentive. The between group differences in response rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The response rates for the incentive and non-incentive groups were 36.1% and 28.7% respectively, yielding a between group difference of 7.4% (-0.7%, 15.6%).
Although the wide CI precludes definitive conclusions, our results suggest that unconditional incentives are effective in vulnerable populations for telephone surveys.
Notes
Cites: J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2003 Oct;12(8):821-814588132
Cites: Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9):752-6012218766
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Aug 1;160(3):295-815258003
Cites: J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Nov;48(11):1325-97490595
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Jun 1;149(11):1057-6210355382
Cites: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 May;14(5):1330-215894697
Cites: BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:5516109160
Cites: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005 Nov;59(11):987-9916234429
Cites: J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Jul;59(7):732-816765277
Cites: BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:1217326837
Cites: Trials. 2009;10:4419545427
Cites: Health Serv Res. 2001 Feb;35(6):1339-4611221822
Cites: BMJ. 2002 May 18;324(7347):118312016181
Cites: Eur J Epidemiol. 2010 Apr;25(4):231-520157845
Cites: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 Feb;13(2):277-814973100
PubMed ID
23083313 View in PubMed
Less detail