Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2007 Sep;120(3):638-46.
doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.05.026. Epub 2007 Jul 12.

The prevalence of food allergy: a meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The prevalence of food allergy: a meta-analysis

Roberto J Rona et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007 Sep.

Abstract

Background: There is uncertainty about the prevalence of food allergy in communities.

Objective: To assess the prevalence of food allergy by performing a meta-analysis according to the method of assessment used.

Methods: The foods assessed were cow's milk, hen's egg, peanut, fish, shellfish, and an overall estimate of food allergy. We summarized the information in 5 categories: self-reported symptoms, specific IgE positive, specific skin prick test positive, symptoms combined with sensitization, and food challenge studies. We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for publications since 1990. The meta-analysis included only original studies. They were stratified by age groups: infant/preschool, school children, and adults.

Results: A total of 934 articles were identified, but only 51 were considered appropriate for inclusion. The prevalence of self-reported food allergy was very high compared with objective measures. There was marked heterogeneity between studies regardless of type of assessment or food item considered, and in most analyses this persisted after age stratification. Self-reported prevalence of food allergy varied from 1.2% to 17% for milk, 0.2% to 7% for egg, 0% to 2% for peanuts and fish, 0% to 10% for shellfish, and 3% to 35% for any food.

Conclusion: There is a marked heterogeneity in the prevalence of food allergy that could be a result of differences in study design or methodology, or differences between populations.

Clinical implications: We recommend that measurements be made by using standardized methods, if possible food challenge. We need to be cautious in estimates of prevalence based only on self-reported food allergy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

Substances