Spor · trondk.no · Norsk
Method

How Spor finds patterns

Spor compares how often a symptom follows a specific ingredient against how often the symptom appears otherwise. When the difference is clear enough, that ingredient is surfaced as a candidate for further conversation — never as a diagnosis. Below: the short version for everyone, and a thorough walkthrough for clinicians, with candid notes on strengths and weaknesses.

The short version — for everyone

Every time you log a symptom, Spor looks back at what you took in during the hours before. For each ingredient it compares two numbers:

If the first is clearly higher than the second, that's a pattern worth bringing to your clinician. Spor shows the ratio between those two numbers, never a "probability of allergy" or a "certainty" score. It's a starting point for a conversation, not a conclusion.

We keep the raw counts visible ("7 of 14 meals") and avoid percentages by themselves, because percentages on small numbers mislead easily — 100 % across four events is not the same as 100 % across forty.

The math — for clinicians

For each ingredient we compute relative risk (RR):

RR = P(symptom | ingredient) / P(symptom | no ingredient)

The numerator is the share of intake events containing the ingredient that were followed by a symptom within the reaction window. The denominator is the share of intake events without the ingredient that were followed by a symptom in the same window. RR = 1 means no difference, RR = 2 means the symptom follows the ingredient twice as often as otherwise.

Reaction window

The patient sets a reaction window — default 24 hours. A symptom is linked to every intake event that occurred within that window before symptom onset. The window is per profile, so children, adults and medication trackers can use different windows within the same app.

Minimum thresholds

An ingredient is considered only if:

These floors prevent small-number noise from looking like a real pattern.

Common-ingredient guard

Ingredients present in more than 80 % of all events are excluded from the analysis. They're too ubiquitous to distinguish symptomatic from asymptomatic days. Salt, water, and wheat in a Western diet are typical examples.

Confounder adjustment

When logging a symptom the patient can flag known confounders: poor sleep, stress, acute illness, travel, or menstruation. Symptoms with at least one such flag get half weight in the counting — enough to remain visible, enough to reduce the risk of attributing an association to the ingredient when the real driver is something else.

Association strength bands

RR values are classified in four bands:

Cut-offs are set more conservatively than in typical epidemiological literature, where RR ≥ 3 is often considered strong. We use lower thresholds because self-reported data is noisier than data from controlled studies.

Strengths

Weaknesses and limitations

We're candid about the real limits of the method. The following should always accompany any interpretation of Spor's output:

What Spor does not do

Spor does not diagnose, does not recommend treatment and does not replace clinical advice. The app is hypothesis-generating, not confirmatory. A strong pattern in Spor is a starting point for further evaluation — for example structured elimination-and-reintroduction trials under clinician guidance, or clinically ordered allergy testing.

Thresholds, formulas and adjustments are also described on the method page of the exported PDF report, so patient and clinician can see the same numbers and rules alongside the data. See also Veileder — sources behind the symptom vocabulary for the origin of each clinical label.