The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Allergies and food reactions are common and may be associated with foods including adapted cow's milk formula. Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy or food intolerance. However, it is unclear whether hydrolysed formula can be advocated for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants without evidence of allergy or food intolerance. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of feeding hydrolysed formulas on allergy and food intolerance in infants and children compared to adapted cow's milk or human breast milk. If hydrolysed formulas are effective, to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective including extensively and partially hydrolysed formulas. To determine which infants benefit, including infants at low or high risk of allergy and infants receiving early, short term or prolonged formula feeding. SEARCH STRATEGY: The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. The review was updated with searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2006), MEDLINE (1966-March 2006), EMBASE (1980-March 2006) and CINAHL (1982-March 2006) and previous reviews including cross references. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compare the use of a hydrolysed infant formula to human milk or cow's milk formula. Trials with >80% follow up of participants were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eligibility of studies for inclusion, methodological quality and data extraction were assessed independently by each review author. Primary outcomes included clinical allergy, specific allergies and food intolerance. Meta-analysis was conducted using a fixed effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials compared early, short term hydrolysed formula to human milk feeding. No significant difference in infant allergy or childhood cow's milk allergy (CMA) were reported. No eligible trial compared prolonged hydrolysed formula to human milk feeding. Two trials compared early, short term hydrolysed formula to cow's milk formula feeding. No significant benefits were reported. One large quasi-random study reported a reduction in infant CMA of borderline significance in low risk infants (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38, 1.00). Ten eligible studies compared prolonged feeding with hydrolysed formula versus cow's milk formula in high risk infants. Meta-analysis found a significant reduction in infant allergy (seven studies, 2514 infants; typical RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66, 0.94), but not in the incidence of childhood allergy (two studies, 950 infants; typical RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69, 1.05). There was no significant difference in infant eczema (eight studies, 2558 infants, typical RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68, 1.04), childhood eczema incidence (two studies, 950 infants, typical RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.63, 1.10), childhood eczema prevalence (one study, 872 infants; RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43, 1.02), or infant or childhood asthma, rhinitis and food allergy. One study reported a significant reduction in infants with CMA with confirmed atopy (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15, 0.89). Subgroup analysis of trials blinded to formula found no significant difference in infant allergy (four studies, 2156 infants; typical RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69, 1.08) or childhood allergy incidence (one study, 872 infants; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73, 1.14). No eligible trial examined the effect of prolonged hydrolysed formula feeding on allergy beyond early childhood. There is evidence that preterm or low birthweight infants fed a hydrolysed preterm formula have significantly reduced weight gain, but not in other growth parameters (head circumference or length). Studies in term infants report no adverse effects on growth. Subgroup analysis of trials of partially hydrolysed versus cow's milk formula found a significant reduction in infant allergy (six studies, 1391 infants; typical RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65, 0.97) but not childhood allergy, or infant or childhood asthma, eczema or rhinitis. Methodological concerns were the same as for the overall analysis. Analysis of trials of extensively hydrolysed formula versus cow's milk formula found no significant differences in allergy or food intolerance. Infants fed extensively hydrolysed formula compared with partially hydrolysed formula had a significant reduction in food allergy (two studies, 341 infants; typical RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19, 0.99), but there was no significant difference in all allergy or any other specific allergy incidence. Comparing extensively hydrolysed casein containing formula with cow's milk formula, one study (431 infants) reported a significant reduction in childhood allergy incidence (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53, 0.97). Meta-analysis found a significant reduction in infant eczema (three studies, 1237 infants; typical RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51, 0.97). One study reported a significant reduction in childhood eczema incidence (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44, 0.98) and prevalence (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27, 0
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Zeiger, R. S., & Heller, S. (1995) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/s0091-6749(95)70074-9 · Cited by 539
LILJA, G., DANNAEUS, A., FOUCARD, T., GRAFF‐LONNEVIG, V., JOHANSSON, S. G. O., & ÖMAN, H. (1989) · Clinical & Experimental Allergy · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.1989.tb02416.x · Cited by 167
Cited by
Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) 2008*
Bousquet, J., Khaltaev, N., Cruz, A. A., Denburg, J., Fokkens, W. J., Togias, A., Zuberbier, T., Baena‐Cagnani, C. E., Canonica, G. W., Van Weel, C., et al. (2008) · Allergy · doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01620.x · Cited by 4,729
Boyce, J. A., Assa'ad, A., Burks, A. W., Jones, S. M., Sampson, H. A., Wood, R. A., Plaut, M., Cooper, S. F., Fenton, M. J., Arshad, S. H., et al. (2010) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2010.10.008 · Cited by 2,350
Food allergy: A practice parameter update—2014
Sampson, H. A., Aceves, S., Bock, S. A., James, J., Jones, S., Lang, D., Nadeau, K., Nowak-Wegrzyn, A., Oppenheimer, J., Perry, T. T., et al. (2014) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2014.05.013 · Cited by 845
Burks, A. W., Tang, M., Sicherer, S., Muraro, A., Eigenmann, P. A., Ebisawa, M., Fiocchi, A., Chiang, W., Beyer, K., Wood, R., et al. (2012) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.02.001 · Cited by 600
Diagnosing and Managing Common Food Allergies: A Systematic Review
Chafen, J. J. S., Newberry, S. J., Riedl, M. A., Bravata, D. M., Maglione, M., Suttorp, M. J., Sundaram, V., Paige, N. M., Towfigh, A., Hulley, B. J., et al. (2010) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2010.582 · Cited by 482
Metadata
- Authors
- Osborn, D. A., & Sinn, J. K. H.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-10-18
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- CD003664-CD003664
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1865750873
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 2
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Status
- Retracted
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd003664.pub3
- The paper
- Osborn, D. A., & Sinn, J. K. H. (2006). Formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003664.pub3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.