Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:36:34.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Feeding difficulties in children fed a cows’ milk elimination diet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2021

Vanessa Cristina de Castro Rodrigues
Affiliation:
Post Graduation Program on Nutrition, Federal University of São Paulo. 893 Napoleão de Barros Street, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, SP04024-002, Brazil
Patrícia da Graça Leite Speridião
Affiliation:
Pediatric Gastroenterology Division, Federal University of São Paulo. 781 Pedro de Toledo Street, 12th floor, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, SP04039-032, Brazil Nutrition Undergraduate Course, Federal University of São Paulo. 136 Silva Jardim Street, Vila Mathias, Santos, SP11015-020, Brazil
Adriana Sanudo
Affiliation:
Department of Preventive Medicine, Federal University of São Paulo. 740 Botucatu Street, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, SP04023-062, Brazil
Mauro Batista Morais*
Affiliation:
Pediatric Gastroenterology Division, Federal University of São Paulo. 781 Pedro de Toledo Street, 12th floor, Vila Clementino, São Paulo, SP04039-032, Brazil
*
*Corresponding author: Mauro Batista Morais, email maurobmorais@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A cross-sectional study compared feeding difficulties in children aged 2–5 years fed a cows’ milk elimination diet due to food allergy with a control group on an unrestricted diet. All data were obtained online. Specific questionnaires evaluated three types of feeding difficulties: avoidant eating, picky eating and feeding problems. The median scores of feeding difficulties in the elimination diet (n 146) and control (n 109) groups were, respectively: picky eating (31 v. 27; P = 0·148), avoidant eating (3 v. 3; P = 0·508) and feeding problems (38 v. 34, P = 0·032). Picky eating was more frequent in the elimination diet (35·4 %) than in the controls (23·3 %; P = 0·042), but no difference was observed for avoidant eating (23·9 % v. 20·4 %, P = 0·508) and feeding problems (32·1 % v. 28·4 %, P = 0·541). Picky eating was associated with lower values of weight-for-age z-scores in both groups. Multivariate analyses identified associations of the three feeding difficulties with previous food refusal and/or inappetence in the elimination diet group. Current constipation and anticipatory gagging were associated with feeding difficulties in both groups. In conclusion, children on an elimination diet presented higher frequency of picky eating and higher scores of feeding problems. Picky eating was associated with lower values of weight-for-age z-scores. Food refusal and/or inappetence as clinical manifestations of food allergy were associated with feeding difficulties at the moment of the survey. Current constipation and anticipatory gagging were associated with picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

Cows’ milk protein allergy (CMPA) is the most common food allergy in infancy, affecting 2–3 % of infants(Reference Vieira, Morais and Spolidoro1Reference Savage and Johns4). A cows’ milk elimination diet nutritionally adequate to fulfil nutritional requirements and promote growth is essential for all patients with CMPA, not only before but also after diagnostic confirmation, and must be maintained until the child develops tolerance to milk proteins(Reference Luyt, Ball and Makwana3). In recent decades, a rise in CMPA persistence into late childhood has been shown, with half the children still on an elimination diet by 5 years of age(Reference Wood, Sicherer and Vickery5,Reference Santos, Dias and Pinheiro6) . These findings strengthen the importance of studying children on elimination diets up to 5 years of age(Reference Savage and Johns4Reference Spergel10).

Feeding difficulties are also common in childhood, with a prevalence ranging from 25 % to 50 % in children with normal neurological development(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11). Feeding difficulties are a useful umbrella term that simply suggests there is a feeding problem of some sort(Reference Kerzner, Milano and MacLean12). Feeding difficulties encompass a broad range, from mild and transient cases with no repercussion in nutritional status to severe cases(Reference Kerzner, Milano and MacLean12) that may place children at risk for malnutrition, failure to thrive, behavioural and developmental disorders(Reference Ramsay, Martel and Porporino13).

Feeding difficulties may be associated with food allergies(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11,Reference Meyer14) , probably as a consequence of the discomfort caused by symptoms and/or by elimination diets, that can limit exposure to new foods and disrupt feeding skill acquisition and the relationship with food(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11).

As far as we know two studies have been published on feeding difficulties in infants and children fed a cows’ milk elimination diet(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15,Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16) . In a tertiary referral centre in London, an avoidant eating score(Reference Wright, Parkinson and Shipton17) was used to assess feeding difficulties in 437 children with food protein-induced gastrointestinal allergies. Avoidant eating was characterised in the presence of manifestations of food aversion, like gagging on textured foods, spitting food out and turning head away or closing mouth when food is offered(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15). Avoidant eating was found in 40 % of the children (according to information reported by parents) and was associated with the number of foods eliminated from the diet, vomiting, constipation, rectal bleeding, headaches, lethargy, night sweating, joint pain and faltering growth(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15). The other study compared sixty-six infants and children on an elimination diet and sixty controls on an unrestricted diet recruited from allergy and health visitor clinics on the Isle of Wight(Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16). Feeding difficulties were assessed through two instruments: (1) the Montreal Children’s Hospital Feeding Scale (which can detect feeding problems related to the lack of motivation for eating, oral-motor deficits, food selectivity according to texture or taste)(Reference Ramsay, Martel and Porporino13); (2) the picky eater questionnaire (picky or fussy eating are terms used to describe children who accept a limited number of foods, are unwilling to try unfamiliar foods, have strong food preferences and/or other undesirable eating behaviours)(Reference Carruth, Skinner and Houck18Reference Taylor, Wernimont and Northstone21). Considering the assessment through both instruments, participants consuming a cows’ milk elimination diet had higher scores for picky eating and feeding problems than those consuming an unrestricted diet. In this study, no relationship was found between both scores and growth. Higher scores of feeding problems using the Montreal Scale were correlated with higher number of symptoms, colic, wheezing/whistling in chest and dry cough at night(Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16).

There are still many gaps in understanding feeding difficulties in children fed elimination diets for treating CMPA, such as their frequency rates in several countries in the world, the repercussion on weight and height and whether there are associated socio-demographic, dietary and clinical characteristics, which could be used as red flags for an earlier diagnosis of feeding difficulties. It is important to emphasise that both CMPA and feeding difficulties may be accompanied by nutritional impairment(Reference Vieira, Morais and Spolidoro1,Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11,Reference Kerzner, Milano and MacLean12,Reference Meyer14,Reference Medeiros, Speridião and Sdepanian22Reference Ercan and Tel Adıgüzel24) . So, expanded knowledge on this subject may support proposals for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of feeding difficulties and other nutritional disorders(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11,Reference Meyer14) in children with CMPA. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: (1) to compare the scores and the frequency rates of feeding difficulties (picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems using the Montreal Scale) in children aged 2–5 years fed a cows’ milk elimination diet due to food allergy, with a control group on an unrestricted diet; (2) to verify whether these three feeding difficulties are associated with socio-demographic, anthropometric, dietary and clinical data.

Materials and methods

Study design

This was a cross-sectional study to investigate picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems in children on a cows’ milk elimination diet, as well as socio-demographic, anthropometric, dietary and clinical data associated with these three feeding difficulties. A control group comprised children from the same age group who were fed an unrestricted diet.

Sample

Two groups aged 2–5 years were established: (1) the cows’ milk elimination diet group and (2) control group. The group on an elimination diet consisted of children fed a diet free of cows’ milk and dairy products, due to CMPA, for at least 6 months. Children fed a cows’ milk elimination diet due to other reasons, such as vegetarianism and lactose intolerance, were not included. The control group was composed of children with no history of CMPA and who were fed an unrestricted diet.

In order to recruit volunteers, invitations were posted on the internet in groups and fanpages of Facebook (Facebook Corporation). The search words ‘alergia ao leite de vaca’, ‘alergia alimentar’ and ‘APLV’ (in English: ‘cows’ milk allergy’, ‘food allergy’ and ‘CMPA’) were entered on the Facebook page in order to identify groups and fanpages that gather parents of children fed a cows’ milk elimination diet. The invitation disclosed in the selected groups and fanpages presented the study objectives, inclusion criteria and the link to the Free and Informed Consent Form. The researchers’ contact details were made available to clarify any questions. The same procedure was performed for the control group, except for the search words used to identify Facebook groups and fanpages, which were: ‘criança’, ‘mãe’, ‘bebê’ (in English: ‘children’, ‘mother’, ‘baby’), ‘kids’ and ‘baby’. It was not possible to estimate the number of people who read the invitations.

The exclusion criteria were: (1) insufficient questionnaire data and (2) a previous history of diseases that could require significant diet modifications or that could lead to nutritional impairment or feeding problems (e.g., coeliac disease, hypothyroidism, chronic kidney disease, autism). For the control group, living in the same home as children with CMPA was also an exclusion criterion.

Electronic forms for data collection

Data collection was performed via the Internet using electronic forms hosted on the SoGoSurvey platform. Volunteers who completed and agreed to the Terms of Free and Informed Consent had access to the research electronic forms, which contained questions to collect the following data:

  • Data related to the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

  • Socio-demographic, mother’s education level, family history of allergies and previous or current maternal history of food allergy (to cows’ milk or other foods). Children with two or more first-degree relatives with previous or current history of any kind of allergic disease were classified as having ‘high risk of food allergy’(Reference Koplin, Allen and Gurrin25).

  • Previous clinical manifestations related to CMPA (present before the elimination diet initiation), such as food refusal/inappetence, colic, nausea/vomiting, diarrhoea, blood in stools, eczema, urticaria, and faltering growth, among others; and characteristics of the elimination diet (only in the electronic form of the elimination diet group).

  • Current constipation and anticipatory gagging. Constipation and anticipatory gagging were investigated as in earlier studies about feeding difficulties(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15,Reference Levy, Levy and Zangen26Reference de Oliveira, Jardim-Botelho and Morais30) . Anticipatory gagging was characterised as occasional or frequent retching when seeing or smelling specific foods(Reference Levine, Bachar and Tsangen27). Constipation was characterised by the presence of at least two of the following symptoms: (1) painful, uncomfortable or hard bowel movements; (2) stool consistency lower than four on the Bristol scale and (3) frequency of bowel movements every three or more days. This criterion was based on published literature(Reference Hyams, Colletti and Faure31,Reference Hyams, Di Lorenzo and Saps32) .

  • Current weight and height.

The anthropometric evaluation was based on data from medical records. Only values of weight and height measured by a paediatrician or other healthcare professional within 90 d before the inclusion date were considered. When these data were not available, parents were contacted through WhatsApp messages or e-mail and requested to inform values from medical records measured within the 90 d after the inclusion date. The child’s age on the measurement date was used to calculate the weight-for-age, height-for-age and BMI-for-age z-scores using Anthro version 3.2.2 and Anthro plus version 1.0.4 (WHO). The anthropometric classification was calculated according to the WHO recommendations as z-score < –2 sd to classify low height-for-age (stunting) and low BMI-for-age (wasting). BMI-for-age z-score > +2 sd and ≤ +3 sd was the cut-off point used to classify overweight, and obesity if > +3 sd(33).

  • Questions to assess feeding difficulties (picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems):

Taking into account that questionnaires to assess feeding difficulties were not available in Brazilian Portuguese, the following instruments previously used to study feeding difficulties in healthy children and children on elimination diets(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15,Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16) were translated into Brazilian Portuguese and adapted for this survey (online Supplementary Materials 1, 2 and 3):

    • Picky eating questionnaire: the instrument contained nine questions related to the child’s feeding behaviour and maternal feelings, concerns and strategies used to feed the child. It was adapted from a questionnaire developed and applied to children aged 2–7 years(Reference Carruth, Skinner and Houck18,Reference Carruth and Skinner19) . The answers to each question were scored on a Likert scale ranging from one to seven. This instrument does not define a cut-off point indicative of a picky eating diagnosis. Therefore, considering the prevalence of picky eating observed in studies conducted in Natal, Brazil (25·4 % of 301 healthy children on an unrestricted diet aged 2–6 years from public and private day care centres)(Reference Maranhão, Aguiar and Lira34) and in Rotterdam, the Netherlands (27·6 % of 3627 children aged 3 years from a prospective population-based cohort)(Reference Cano, Tiemeier and Van Hoeken20), the score corresponding to the 75th percentile of the group fed an unrestricted diet (control) was adopted as a cut-off point to characterise picky eating.

    • Avoidant eating score: the instrument contained seven questions about aversive eating behaviours (gagging on textured foods, pushing food away, holding food in the mouth, spitting food out, throwing food on the floor, crying during meal times, turning head away or closing mouth when food is offered). It was adapted from a score described in a cohort of children aged 29–33 months(Reference Wright, Parkinson and Shipton17) and modified to study children with food protein-induced gastrointestinal allergies(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15). The responses of each question were scored on a scale ranging from zero to two. The sum of points higher than five characterised children with avoidant eating behaviour.

    • Feeding problems scale (The Montreal Children’s Hospital Feeding Scale): the instrument contained fourteen questions covering aspects of the oral-motor and oral-sensory domains, appetite, mealtime behaviours, maternal concerns and strategies used to feed the child and family reactions to child’s feeding behaviour. It was adapted from an instrument developed for children aged 6 months to 6 years(Reference Ramsay, Martel and Porporino13). The responses to each question were scored on a Likert scale ranging from one to seven. The sum of points higher than 45 characterised children with feeding problems.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using Epi-Info version 3.4.3 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), SigmaPlot version 12.5 (Systat Software) and Stata/se 15·1 (Stata-Corp, 2017; StataCorp LLC). A P-value lower than 5 % was considered in all analyses.

The sample size estimate was based on the expected prevalence of feeding difficulties characterised using the Montreal Scale. Therefore, data were obtained from the only study that compared the frequency rates of feeding difficulties among children on a cows’ milk elimination diet and children on an unrestricted diet (13·6 and 1·6 %, respectively)(Reference Meyer14). An α error of 5 %, power of 80 % and safety margin of 20 % were used to estimate a minimum number of ninety-two individuals in each group.

Data normality was tested using Shapiro–Wilk test. A two-sided P value was used in all tests. A descriptive analysis was performed where categorical variables were summarised by the number (n) and percentage (%) and non-categorical variables as mean and standard deviation or as median (P50 %) when the normality assumption was not satisfied.

Bivariate analyses compared weight and height z-scores of children with and without picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems.

For the whole sample (both groups), full multivariate logistic regression models were built in two stages to evaluate the association of the three feeding difficulties studied with socio-demographic, dietary and clinical characteristics. In the first stage, simple logistic regression models of each dependent variable, with each explanatory variable (covariates), were evaluated. From these bivariate analyses, all variables that had a P value lower than 0·20 were included in the multiple logistic regression models(Reference Kleinbaum, Kupper and Muller35). The variable ‘being fed an elimination diet’ was included in the models regardless of having a P value < 0·20 in the bivariate analyses. Explanatory variables that were not significant in this multilinear model (P ≥ 0·05) were removed one by one until the final adjusted model was reached. The same procedure was performed for the second multiple logistic regression models including only the elimination diet group to evaluate the association of the three feeding difficulties studied with past clinical manifestations of CMPA and characteristics of the elimination diet.

Cronbach α was applied to analyse the internal consistency of the three instruments used to evaluate feeding difficulties.

Ethical approval

The project was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP) (CAAE:54771616.3.0000.5505/2016).

Results

Description of sample

Data collection was performed from July 2016 to August 2017. The e-forms were completed by 275 children’s parents, of whom twenty were not included in the analysis: history of diseases that required significant diet modifications or that could cause nutritional impairment or feeding difficulties (n 12), residence outside Brazil (n 6) and control child living in the same home as children with CMPA (n 2). The elimination diet group consisted of 146 children, and the control group included 109 children on an unrestricted diet. The forms were completed predominantly by mothers, both in the elimination diet group (97·9 %) and in the control group (94·5 %, P = 0·177). The sample included participants from all Brazilian regions (Southeast, 66·3 %; South, 15·3 %; Northeast, 12·1 %; Midwest, 4·3 % and North, 2·0 %).

The groups were similar regarding age, type of delivery, proportion of premature births, birth weight and frequency of children exclusively breastfed for more than 4 months (Table 1). The group on an elimination diet exhibited higher frequency of male sex, high risk of food allergy (in children) and maternal history of food allergies. In the control group, higher socio-economic status, higher maternal education level and higher frequency of breast-feeding for more than 12 months were observed. In the elimination diet group, the assessment of current anthropometric measurements revealed higher frequency of stunting and lower z-score values for all evaluated parameters, except for BMI-for-age. The occurrence of constipation and anticipatory gagging at the time of the study was similar in both groups.

Table 1. Characteristics of the cows’ milk elimination diet and control groups

(Numbers and percentages; mean values and standard deviations*)

* Frequency rates expressed as percentages, Pearson χ 2 test or Fisher’s exact test; mean values and standard deviations, Student’s t test.

Socio-economic status according to the Brazilian Criteria 2015 and social class distribution update for 2016, ABEP – Brazilian Association of Research Companies (http://www.abep.org/criterio-brasil).

Online Supplementary Material 4 shows the frequency of the patients’ past clinical manifestations (present before starting the cows’ milk elimination diet). In 90 % of the children, the onset of clinical manifestations was in the first year of life (median age = 2 months; P25 = 0·5; P75 = 6·0).

In the elimination diet group, the median age of elimination diet initiation was 6·0 months (P25 = 3·0; P75 = 12·0). The duration of the elimination diet since the suspect of CMPA until the online survey ranged from 6 to 65·8 months (median = 29·9 months; P25 = 21·3; P75 = 38·7). Most children (63·0 %) had more than one food eliminated from the diet. In addition to cows’ milk, the most frequently eliminated foods were soyabean (37·7 %), egg (28·8 %), extensively hydrolysed protein formulas (22·6 %), peanuts (21·9 %), wheat and/or gluten (13·0 %), one or more fruits (11·0 %), colour additives (6·2 %) and beef (5·5 %). Other foods were excluded at a frequency rate lower than 5 %.

Scores and frequency of feeding difficulties

Complete data for the evaluation of feeding difficulties were obtained in more than 93 % of both groups: for picky eating in 144/146 (98·6 %) children on an elimination diet and 103/109 (94·5 %) controls; for avoidant eating in 138/146 (94·5 %) children on an elimination diet and 108/109 (99·1 %) controls; and for feeding problems in 137/146 (93·8 %) children on an elimination diet and 102/109 (93·6 %) controls.

There was no difference in picky eating scores between the elimination diet group (median = 31; 25th and 75th percentiles: 19 and 39) and the control group (median = 27; 25th and 75th percentiles: 19 and 35; P = 0·148). The frequency rate of picky eating was higher in children on an elimination diet (35·4 %) than that in the control group (23·3 %; P = 0·042), considering a score > 35 (75th percentile of control group) as the cut-off point.

Avoidant eating scores were also similar between the elimination diet group (median = 3; 25th and 75th percentiles: 2 and 5) and the control group (median = 3; 25th and 75th percentiles: 2 and 5; P = 0·164), as well as the frequency rates of avoidant eating (23·9 and 20·4 %, respectively, P = 0·508).

The feeding problems score was higher in the elimination diet group (median = 38; 25th and 75th percentiles: 28 and 50) than in the control group (median = 34; 25th and 75th percentiles: 24 and 48; P = 0·032). However, the frequency rates of feeding problems were similar between groups (32·1 and 28·4 %, respectively; P = 0·541).

The three instruments had high internal consistency in the analyses calculated for the whole sample (Cronbach α = 0·85, 0·80 and 0·87 for picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems, respectively).

Weight and height according to the presence of feeding difficulties

Table 2 presents the anthropometric data according to the presence of feeding difficulties in the elimination diet and control groups. Lower weight-for-age z-scores were observed in children with picky eating in both groups. BMI-for-age z-scores were lower in both groups for picky eating and in the elimination diet group for avoidant eating and feeding problems; however, statistical significance was reached only for picky eating in the elimination diet group. Height-for-age z-scores were similar in both groups independently of the presence of picky eating, avoidant eating or feeding problems.

Table 2. Anthropometric indicators for the cows’ milk elimination diet and control groups according to the presence of feeding difficulties

(Numbers; mean values and standard deviations*)

* Mean values and standard deviations, Student’s t test.

Socio-demographic, dietary and clinical characteristics associated with feeding difficulties

Multiple logistic regressions were performed on all children from both groups to evaluate variables associated with feeding difficulties. Being fed an elimination diet was included in the multiple regression analyses as an independent variable along with those variables in the univariate analyses with P values < 0·20 (online Supplementary Material 5). The results obtained after adjustment of the models are presented in Table 3. Being fed a cows’ milk elimination diet and breast-feeding for less than 1 year were associated only with picky eating (score > 35). Constipation and anticipatory gagging showed strong associations with the three feeding difficulties studied. Premature birth was associated with avoidant eating and feeding problems. Younger age (age 2–3 years, n 198; compared with 4–5 years, n 57) was associated with avoidant eating. Sex, socio-economic status and maternal education were not associated with any of the studied feeding difficulties.

Table 3. Adjusted odds ratio evaluating the associations between feeding difficulties and socio-demographic, dietary and current clinical characteristics for the cows’ milk elimination diet and control groups*

(Adjusted odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals)

ORadj, adjusted odds ratio.

* Logistic regression models were performed with data from the whole sample to investigate associations of each feeding difficulty with the children’s characteristics. OR were estimated from these equations. Being fed an elimination diet was included in all models, regardless of having a P value < 0·20 in the univariate analyses. Variables highlighted in bold were associated (P < 0·05) with picky eating, avoidant eating or feeding problems in the final models.

Variable not included in the regression model as presented a P value ≥ 0·20 in the univariate analysis (online Supplementary Material 5).

Previous clinical manifestations and elimination diet characteristics associated with feeding difficulties in children on a cows’ milk elimination diet

In the elimination diet group, the past clinical manifestations present before starting the elimination diet and current diet characteristics that exhibited P < 0·20 in the univariate analyses (online Supplementary Material 6) were included in the multiple regression models as independent variables. The multiple regression analyses are shown in Table 4. Past food refusal/inappetence was strongly associated with the three feeding difficulties studied. Past faltering growth was associated with picky eating. Elimination of more than one food from the diet was associated with feeding problems. Other variables included in the multiple regression analyses (number of clinical manifestations and past occurrence of other clinical manifestations) were not associated with any of the studied feeding difficulties.

Table 4. Adjusted odds ratio evaluating the associations between feeding difficulties and past clinical manifestations of food allergy (present before starting the elimination diet) and current elimination diet characteristics for the cows’ milk elimination diet group*

(Adjusted odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals)

ORadj, adjusted odds ratio.

* Logistic regression models were performed with data from the elimination diet group to investigate associations of each feeding difficulty with current dietary characteristics and past CMPA clinical manifestations. OR were estimated from these equations. Variables highlighted in bold were associated (P < 0·05) with picky eating, avoidant eating or feeding problems in the final models.

Variable not included in the regression model as presented a P value ≥ 0·20 in the univariate analysis (online Supplementary Material 5).

Discussion

Picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems were found in 20–35 % of children, which is in accordance with data from literature(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11). Picky eating frequency and feeding problems scores were higher in the children on an elimination diet. Food refusal and/or inappetence as clinical manifestations of food allergy were associated with feeding difficulties. Children with picky eating from both groups presented lower values of weight-for-age z-scores. The three investigated feeding difficulties were associated with current constipation and anticipatory gagging in both groups.

In the paediatric population, there is a great variability in the prevalence of feeding difficulties, which may be due to differences in the diagnostic criteria(Reference Taylor, Wernimont and Northstone21,Reference Taylor and Emmett36Reference Cole, An and Lee40) . On the other hand, there are few articles concerning feeding difficulties in children fed a cows’ milk elimination diet due to CMPA. One study evaluated avoidant eating(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15) and the other searched for picky eating and feeding problems using the Montreal Scale(Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16). Therefore, we decided to study the same feeding difficulties with the same questionnaires. The first was a retrospective non-controlled study held in a tertiary centre in London that showed avoidant eating in 40 % of children aged 1 month to 13 years with gastrointestinal allergies(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15). In our study, avoidant eating was found in 23·9 % of the children on an elimination diet and in 20·4 % of the control group. The second study was conducted on the Isle of Wight and evaluated picky eating and feeding problems in children aged 8–30 months fed a cows’ milk elimination diet, compared with a group on an unrestricted diet. Children on an elimination diet presented higher scores of picky eating, while in our study higher frequency (35·4 % v. 23·3 %, P = 0·042) but similar scores were observed. Taking feeding problems into account, in the Isle of Wight the frequency rates found were 13·6 % in the elimination diet group and 1·6 % in the control group(Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16). In our study, there was no statistical difference between the rates of feeding problems (32·1 and 28·4 %, respectively, in the elimination diet and control groups). However, in both studies the scores were higher in the children fed an elimination diet. The relation between feeding difficulties and a cows’ milk elimination diet was also addressed by multivariate analyses (Table 3). A statistically significant positive association was found between being fed a cow’s milk elimination diet and picky eating, but not with avoidant eating and feeding problems. Even though an association between elimination diet and feeding problems was not found, the children on an elimination diet scored higher for feeding problems than those of the control group. Therefore, our results confirm that children on an elimination diet are at greater risk of feeding difficulties. Some hypotheses may support this finding. The presence of CMPA symptoms in the first year of life may promote delay in the introduction of new foods and textures and affect negatively this window of opportunity for the development of motor-oral skills(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15,Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16) . Feeding pleasure can be affected in the presence of pain or discomfort caused by symptoms, contributing for the development of feeding difficulties(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11). Additionally, multiple dietary restrictions can limit exposure to new foods, increasing the risk of feeding difficulties(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11,Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15) , as was confirmed in our study from the association between the elimination of more than one food and feeding problems (OR = 4·84; Table 4).

Concerning our control group, it must be pointed out that the frequency rates of feeding difficulties were similar to those found in studies conducted in Brazil(Reference Maranhão, Aguiar and Lira34) and in other countries(Reference Wright, Parkinson and Shipton17,Reference Benjasuwantep, Chaithirayanon and Eiamudomkan38) . However, it is important to note that, in both groups from our study, the frequency and scores of feeding problems and picky eating were higher than those found in the Isle of Wight. The lower age of the children from the British study (age range: 8–30 months; mean: 12·4 and 15·0 months) might be an explanation, since the children from our study were older (age range: 2–5 years; mean: 3·3 and 3·4 years) and the prevalence of picky eating may increase with age, with a peak by the age of 3 years(Reference Cano, Tiemeier and Van Hoeken20,Reference Taylor and Emmett36,Reference Brown, Perrin and Peterson41) . In the multivariate analysis shown in Table 3, a higher risk for avoidant eating (OR = 3·09) was found in children aged 2–3 years, compared with 4- to 5-year-old children. Although the same questionnaires were used, the comparison of the three studies should be evaluated taking into account the differences between these three case series in relation to socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Despite the heterogeneous cases and results of these three studies, it is possible to conclude that feeding difficulties are more frequent or severe in children on an elimination diet. Another recent study conducted in Turkey(Reference Ercan and Tel Adıgüzel24) evaluated preschoolers fed an unrestricted diet who were, however, fed a cows’ milk elimination diet in their first 2 years of life. These children presented, in relation to the controls, higher scores of food avoidance and satiety responsiveness, as well as higher frequency rates of children with low intake of dairy, macro and micronutrients. Supported by previous studies(Reference Maslin, Grundy and Glasbey42,Reference Mennella, Forestell and Morgan43) , these results show that the elimination diet may have effects that remain after cows’ milk is reintroduced into the diet.

The repercussions of CMPA and feeding difficulties on weight and height are an important issue. In both groups, picky eating was associated with lower values of body weight (weight- and BMI-for-age; Table 2). Only in the elimination diet group, BMI-for-age of children with avoidant eating and feeding problems showed a tendency to be lower (P-values, respectively, 0·053 and 0·067). The study from the Isle of Wight did not compare specifically the impact of feeding difficulties on the z-scores of weight and height(Reference Maslin, Dean and Arshad16). On the other hand, the study conducted in a tertiary centre in London found an association between avoidant eating and weight loss in children with gastrointestinal allergies(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15). According to recent reviews of the literature, the nutritional impact of picky eating is controversial(Reference Brown, Vander Schaaf and Cohen39,Reference Samuel, Musa-Veloso and Ho44) , but there is a subset of picky eaters at risk of poor weight gain, requiring early identification and nutritional surveillance(Reference Taylor and Emmett36). Possible causes for faltering growth in children with CMPA are: the inadequacy of the elimination diet(Reference Medeiros, Speridião and Sdepanian22,Reference Boaventura, Mendonça and Fonseca23) , higher demand of nutrients due to increased gut permeability, the inflammation and production of inflammatory cytokines and the deficiency of vitamins and minerals important for growth(Reference Meyer14), such as vitamins A and D(Reference Boaventura, Mendonça and Fonseca23). In Brazil, the special formulas for children with CMPA are usually provided by the public healthcare services only until children are 24 months old. Therefore, preschoolers can be fed with nutritionally inadequate milk substitutes(Reference Boaventura, Mendonça and Fonseca23). The nutritional care of children with feeding difficulties and CMPA is even more challenging because, besides the restrictions imposed by the elimination diet, children with feeding difficulties may refuse other foods and have a low intake of nutrients(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11,Reference Meyer14,Reference Ercan and Tel Adıgüzel24) . All these factors may compromise growth.

Concerning the comparison of anthropometric data of the two groups, children on an elimination diet had lower values of height- and weight-for-age compared with the control group (Table 1), as has been described before(Reference Vieira, Morais and Spolidoro1,Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11,Reference Meyer14,Reference Medeiros, Speridião and Sdepanian22,Reference Boaventura, Mendonça and Fonseca23) . However, the three types of feeding difficulties were not associated with lower values of height in both elimination diet and control groups (Table 2). Anyway, our data showed that children on an elimination diet are at risk of lower values of weight, especially those with feeding difficulties, confirming the hypothesis that children on an elimination diet are at greater risk of nutritional impairment(Reference Meyer14), which could be aggravated by feeding difficulties.

For the whole sample, the multivariate analysis of Table 3 also showed a strong positive association between constipation and anticipatory gagging with the three feeding difficulties studied. Constipation was also associated with avoidant eating in the study held in London(Reference Meyer, Rommel and Van Oudenhove15). Even for children on an unrestricted diet, constipation has been associated with feeding difficulties(Reference Tharner, Jansen and Kiefte-de Jong28Reference de Oliveira, Jardim-Botelho and Morais30,Reference Taylor and Emmett36) . It is important to note that in our study, constipation was found in 21·1 and 26·9 % of the elimination diet and control groups, respectively. Such values are within the range of the literature(Reference de Oliveira, Jardim-Botelho and Morais30,Reference Koppen, Vriesman and Saps45) . In children with constipation, it is hypothesised that visceral hypersensitivity, delayed motility and chronic pain or discomfort may affect the sensory perception of food, willingness to eat, appetite and satiety, contributing to the development of feeding difficulties(Reference Chehade, Meyer and Beauregard11). Concerning anticipatory gagging, it has an important role in the diagnosis of feeding difficulties(Reference Levy, Levy and Zangen26,Reference Levine, Bachar and Tsangen27) and was present in approximately 48 and 17 % of children with and without feeding difficulties, respectively (online Supplementary Material 5). A higher frequency rate was also observed in a previous study that found anticipatory gagging in 47 % of the children with feeding difficulties, compared with 2 % in those without feeding difficulties(Reference Levine, Bachar and Tsangen27), confirming the relevance of this manifestation for the investigation of feeding difficulties.

Premature birth was also associated with avoidant eating and feeding problems independently of being fed an elimination diet (Table 3), which is in accordance with studies that identified in children born prematurely a higher risk of feeding difficulties at 2 years(Reference Johnson, Matthews and Draper46) and at 6 years of age(Reference Samara, Johnson and Lamberts47). This association may result from the neurodevelopmental and behavioural problems that might affect preterm infants, delaying feeding skill acquisition and contributing to the development of feeding difficulties(Reference Johnson, Matthews and Draper46). Furthermore, a shorter total duration of breast-feeding was associated with picky eating. Breast-feeding offers the baby the flavours of foods and beverages consumed by the mother, which can influence its food preferences and acceptance(Reference Beauchamp and Mennella48). This highlights that breast-feeding might be a protective factor against picky eating(Reference Taylor, Wernimont and Northstone21,Reference Shim, Kim and Mathai49) .

The multivariate analysis shown in Table 4 studied the relation between previous clinical manifestation of CMPA, present before starting the elimination diet, and feeding difficulties. There was a strong association of past clinical manifestations of faltering growth with picky eating (OR = 3·05) and of food refusal/inappetence with picky eating (OR = 3·20), avoidant eating (OR = 7·48) and feeding problems (OR = 11·03). These manifestations cause anxiety in parents. Inadequate feeding practices can be a consequence, which in turn may contribute to the development and/or perpetuation of feeding difficulties(Reference Levy, Levy and Zangen26).

One of the strengths of this study was the use of the Internet, which allowed for the recruitment of patients from several cities of the country. In Brazil, two of every three adults are Internet users(50). The strategy permitted the exceeding of the planned sample size with low collection cost and low demand for human resources. As far as we know, this was the first study that evaluated the frequency of feeding difficulties in children on an elimination diet outside the UK. Other strengths were the strong internal consistency of the questionnaires applied to evaluate feeding difficulties, and the recruitment of a control group.

This study has the limitations inherent to all cross-sectional studies, so it is not possible to establish a causal relationship. The CMPA diagnosis was established by the physician in charge of the assistance of each child. Therefore, the diagnosis was not always established by the same protocol. The instruments used to assess feeding difficulties were not validated in Brazil; nevertheless, most of the results are in line with previous studies. It must be emphasised that the volunteers in a pilot study did not mention difficulties in understanding the questions and the Cronbach α coefficient confirmed a strong internal consistency. As for the decision to participate in the study, there may have been a greater interest among parents of children with feeding difficulties, but this factor could be present equally in both groups, considering that the decision to participate in the study was voluntary. The assessment of the association between previous clinical manifestations of CMPA and feeding difficulties showed a strong association for faltering growth and food refusal/inappetence. Both can also be present in the history of children on an unrestricted diet, which makes them important manifestations to be investigated in future studies including healthy children. Finally, the higher maternal education level and socio-economic status in the control group might result from regular people’s greater awareness of the importance of being voluntary in research projects. It must be pointed that 84 % of the participants from the whole sample belonged to the higher Brazilian socio-economic levels (A and B). Therefore, the results of this study cannot be automatically extrapolated to the other socio-economic strata. On the other hand, our results justify future studies including participants from other geographic regions and socio-economic status.

In conclusion, children on an elimination diet had higher frequency of pick eating and higher scores of feeding problems in relation to those of the control group. Picky eating was associated with lower values of weight-for-age but not of height-for-age z-scores in both groups. The antecedent of food refusal and/or inappetence as past clinical manifestations of CMPA, before the onset of the elimination diet, were associated with an increased risk of feeding difficulties in preschool years. Constipation and anticipatory gagging at the moment of the survey stood out as clinical manifestations associated with picky eating, avoidant eating and feeding problems.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support given by Danone Nutricia for sponsoring the online platform SoGoSurvey for data collection.

This work was supported by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) (grant number 130332/2016–0). The CNPq had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article.

V. C. de C. R.: formulating the research questions, designing the study, carrying out the study, analysing the data, interpreting the findings, writing and reviewing the article. P. G. L. S: formulating the research questions, designing the study, analysing the data, interpreting the findings, reviewing the article. A. S.: analysing the data, interpreting the findings and reviewing the article. M. B. M.: formulating the research questions, designing the study, carrying out the study, analysing the data, interpreting the findings, writing and reviewing the article. All authors revised the manuscript critically and approved the final version to be submitted.

V. C. de C. R. reports personal fees from Danone Nutricia outside the submitted work. For the remaining authors, no conflict of interest is declared for this article.

Supplementary material

For supplementary materials referred to in this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114521004165

References

Vieira, MC, Morais, MB, Spolidoro, JVN, et al. (2010) A survey on clinical presentation and nutritional status of infants with suspected cow’s milk allergy. BMC Pediatr 10, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborne, NJ, Koplin, JJ, Martin, PE, et al. (2011) Prevalence of challenge-proven IgE-mediated food allergy using population-based sampling and predetermined challenge criteria in infants. J Allergy Clin Immunol 127, 668676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luyt, D, Ball, H, Makwana, N, et al. (2014) BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of cow’s milk allergy. Clin Exp Allergy 44, 642672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savage, J & Johns, CB (2015) Food allergy: epidemiology and natural history. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 35, 4559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, RA, Sicherer, SH & Vickery, BP (2013) The natural history of milk allergy in an observational cohort. J Allergy Clin Immunol 131, 805812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, A, Dias, A & Pinheiro, JA (2010) Predictive factors for the persistence of cow’s milk allergy. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 21, 11271134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flom, JD & Sicherer, SH (2019) Epidemiology of cow’s milk allergy. Nutrients 11, 1051.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prescott, S & Allen, KJ (2011) Food allergy: riding the second wave of the allergy epidemic. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 22, 155160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleischer, DM, Perry, TT, Atkins, D, et al. (2012) Allergic reactions to foods in preschool-aged children in a prospective observational food allergy study. Pediatrics 130, e25e32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spergel, JM (2013) Natural history of cow’s milk allergy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 131, 813814.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chehade, M, Meyer, R & Beauregard, A (2019) Feeding difficulties in children with non-IgE-mediated food allergic gastrointestinal disorders. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 122, 603609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerzner, B, Milano, K, MacLean, WC, et al. (2015) A practical approach to classifying and managing feeding difficulties. Pediatric 135, 344353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramsay, M, Martel, C, Porporino, M, et al. (2011) The Montreal children’s hospital feeding scale: a brief bilingual screening tool for identifying feeding problems. Paediatr Child Health 16, 147151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, R (2018) Nutritional disorders resulting from food allergy in children. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 29, 689704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, R, Rommel, N, Van Oudenhove, L, et al. (2014) Feeding difficulties in children with food protein-induced gastrointestinal allergies. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 29, 17641769.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maslin, K, Dean, T, Arshad, SH, et al. (2015) Fussy eating and feeding difficulties in infants and toddlers consuming a cows’ milk exclusion diet. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 26, 503508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, CM, Parkinson, KN, Shipton, D, et al. (2007) How do toddler eating problems relate to their eating behavior, food preferences, and growth? Pediatrics 120, e1069e1075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carruth, BR, Skinner, J, Houck, K, et al. (1998) The phenomenon of ‘picky eater’: a behavioral marker in eating patterns of toddlers. J Am Coll Nutr 17, 180186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carruth, BR & Skinner, JD (2000) Revisiting the picky eater phenomenon: neophobic behaviors of young children. J Am Coll Nutr 19, 771780.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cano, SC, Tiemeier, H, Van Hoeken, D, et al. (2015) Trajectories of picky eating during childhood: a general population study. Int J Eat Disord 48, 570579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, CM, Wernimont, SM, Northstone, K, et al. (2015) Picky/fussy eating in children: Review of definitions, assessment, prevalence and dietary intakes. Appetite 95, 349359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medeiros, LC, Speridião, PG, Sdepanian, VL, et al. (2004) Nutrient intake and nutritional status of children following a diet free from cow’s milk and cow’s milk by-products. J Pediatr 80, 363370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boaventura, RM, Mendonça, RB, Fonseca, FA, et al. (2019) Nutritional status and food intake of children with cows’ milk allergy. Allergol Immunopathol 47, 544550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ercan, N & Tel Adıgüzel, K (2021) Effect of early childhood cow’s milk elimination diet on eating behaviours, nutrition and growth status at age 2–6 years. J Hum Nutr Diet 00, 110.Google Scholar
Koplin, JJ, Allen, KJ, Gurrin, LC, et al. (2013) The impact of family history of allergy on risk of food allergy: a population-based study of infants. Int J Environ Res Public Health 10, 53645377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levy, Y, Levy, A, Zangen, T, et al. (2009) Diagnostic clues for identification of nonorganic v. organic causes of food refusal and poor feeding. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 48, 355362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, A, Bachar, L, Tsangen, Z, et al. (2015) Screening criteria for diagnosis of infantile feeding disorders as a cause of poor feeding or food refusal. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 52, 563568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tharner, A, Jansen, PW, Kiefte-de Jong, JC, et al. (2015) Bidirectional associations between fussy eating and functional constipation in preschool children. J Pediatr 166, 9196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, CM, Northstone, K, Wernimont, SM, et al. (2016) Picky eating in preschool children: associations with dietary fibre intakes and stool hardness. Appetite 100, 263271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Oliveira, MBB, Jardim-Botelho, A, Morais, MB, et al. (2021) Impact of infant milk-type and childhood eating behaviors on functional constipation in preschool children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 73, e50e56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hyams, J, Colletti, R, Faure, C, et al. (2002) Functional gastrointestinal disorders: working group report of the first world congress of pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology and Nutrition. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 35, S110S117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyams, JS, Di Lorenzo, C, Saps, M, et al. (2016) Functional disorders: children and adolescents. Gastroenterology S0016–5085, 0018100185.Google Scholar
WHO (2017) Guideline: Assessing and Managing Children at Primary Health-Care Facilities to Prevent Overweight and Obesity in the Context of the Double Burden of Malnutrition. Updates for the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI). Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Maranhão, HS, Aguiar, RC, Lira, DTJ, et al. (2018) Feeding difficulties in preschool children, previous feeding practices, and nutritional status. Rev Paul Pediatr 36, 4551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleinbaum, DG, Kupper, LL, Muller, KE, et al. (1998) Applied Regression and Other Multivariable Methods, 3rd ed. Boston: PWS-Kent.Google Scholar
Taylor, CM & Emmett, PM (2020) Picky eating in children: causes and consequences. Proc Nutr Soc 5, 19.Google Scholar
Sanchez, K, Spittle, AJ, Allison, L, et al. (2015) Parent questionnaires measuring feeding disorders in preschool children: a systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol 57, 798807.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjasuwantep, B, Chaithirayanon, S & Eiamudomkan, M (2013) Feeding problems in healthy young children: prevalence, related factors and feeding practices. Pediatr Rep 5, 3842.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, CL, Vander Schaaf, EB, Cohen, GM, et al. (2016) Association of picky eating and food neophobia with weight: a systematic review. Child Obes 12, 247262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cole, NC, An, R, Lee, SY, et al. (2017) Correlates of picky eating and food neophobia in young children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutr Rev 75, 516532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, CL, Perrin, EM & Peterson, KE (2018) Association of picky eating with weight status and dietary quality among low-income preschoolers. Acad Pediatr 18, 334341 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maslin, K, Grundy, J, Glasbey, G, et al. (2016) Cows’ milk exclusion diet during infancy: is there a long-term effect on children’s eating behaviour and food preferences? Pediatr Allergy Immunol 27, 141146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mennella, JA, Forestell, CA, Morgan, LK, et al. (2009) Early milk feeding influences taste acceptance and liking during infancy. Am J Clin Nutr 90, 780S788S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samuel, TM, Musa-Veloso, K & Ho, M (2018) A narrative review of childhood picky eating and its relationship to food intakes, nutritional status, and growth. Nutrients 10, 1992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koppen, IJN, Vriesman, MH, Saps, M, et al. (2018) Prevalence of functional defecation disorders in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pediatr 198, 121130.e6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, S, Matthews, R, Draper, ES, et al. (2016) Eating difficulties in children born late and moderately preterm at 2 years of age: a prospective population-based cohort study. Am J Clin Nutr 103, 406414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samara, M, Johnson, S, Lamberts, K, et al. (2010) Eating problems at age 6 years in a whole population sample of extremely preterm children. Dev Med Child Neurol 52, e16e22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beauchamp, GK & Mennella, JA (2009) Early flavor learning and its impact on later feeding behavior. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 48, S25S30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shim, JE, Kim, J, Mathai, RA, et al. (2011) Associations of infant feeding practices and picky eating behaviors of preschool children. J Am Diet Assoc 111, 13631368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brasil. Presidência da República (2016) Secretaria Especial de Comunicação Social. Pesquisa brasileira de mídia 2016: hábitos de consumo de mídia pela população brasileira (Brazilian media research 2016: consumption habits of media by the Brazilian population). Brasília: Secom.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Characteristics of the cows’ milk elimination diet and control groups(Numbers and percentages; mean values and standard deviations*)

Figure 1

Table 2. Anthropometric indicators for the cows’ milk elimination diet and control groups according to the presence of feeding difficulties(Numbers; mean values and standard deviations*)

Figure 2

Table 3. Adjusted odds ratio evaluating the associations between feeding difficulties and socio-demographic, dietary and current clinical characteristics for the cows’ milk elimination diet and control groups*(Adjusted odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals)

Figure 3

Table 4. Adjusted odds ratio evaluating the associations between feeding difficulties and past clinical manifestations of food allergy (present before starting the elimination diet) and current elimination diet characteristics for the cows’ milk elimination diet group*(Adjusted odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals)

Supplementary material: File

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material 1

Download Rodrigues et al. supplementary material(File)
File 53.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material 2

Download Rodrigues et al. supplementary material(File)
File 292.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material 3

Download Rodrigues et al. supplementary material(File)
File 43.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material

Rodrigues et al. supplementary material 4

Download Rodrigues et al. supplementary material(File)
File 49.8 KB