King D S
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco 94143.
Med Hypotheses. 1988 Jan;25(1):7-16. doi: 10.1016/0306-9877(88)90039-4.
Clinical reports have advocated intradermal and sublingual provocative food testing as effective methods of identifying food sensitivities. However, studies assessing their reliability and/or validity have generally reached negative conclusions. These studies commonly have serious flaws in design and analysis. These include: (1) the administration of food antigens to subjects without verifying sensitivity to them, and then comparing responses to antigens and placebos, (2) the failure to implement double-blind procedures with placebo controls, (3) the failure to analyse results statistically, and (4) improper statistical analysis. In some cases, re-analysis of the data provided seriously affects the conclusions of the study. Overall, the evidence suggests that both intradermal and sublingual provocative food tests are capable of provoking reactions above placebo levels, but whether they are sufficiently reliable and valid to be clinically useful is questionable.
临床报告主张皮内和舌下激发性食物试验是识别食物敏感性的有效方法。然而，评估其可靠性和/或有效性的研究通常得出否定结论。这些研究在设计和分析上普遍存在严重缺陷。这些缺陷包括：（1）在未验证受试者对食物抗原敏感性的情况下给他们施用食物抗原，然后比较对抗原和安慰剂的反应；（2）未对安慰剂对照实施双盲程序；（3）未对结果进行统计分析；（4）统计分析不当。在某些情况下，对所提供数据的重新分析严重影响了研究结论。总体而言，有证据表明皮内和舌下激发性食物试验都能够引发高于安慰剂水平的反应，但它们是否足够可靠和有效从而在临床上有用仍值得怀疑。
