ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2007
Pre-endoscopy serological testing for coeliac disease: evaluation of a clinical decision tool.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 166 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Guideline
- Guideline
- Adherence to guidelines, pitfalls, and emerging technologies in endoscopic practice for celiac disease: a nationwide SIGENP survey.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- The hidden link between iron deficiency and celiac disease: a clinical perspective.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Celiac disease: mechanisms and emerging therapeutics.Trends in pharmacological sciences · 2023Review
- Evaluation of Celiac Disease by Minimally Invasive Biomarkers in a Spanish Pediatric Population.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Clinical classification and long-term outcomes of seronegative coeliac disease: a 20-year multicentre follow-up study.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2021Article
- Article
- The prevalence of celiac disease in women with infertility-A systematic review with meta-analysis.Reproductive medicine and biology · 2021Article
- A practical approach to the patient with chronic diarrhoea.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2021Article
- Multiple Autoimmune Syndrome With Alopecia Universalis and Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura.Cureus · 2021Article
- Review
- Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2019Review
- Value of routine duodenal mucosal biopsies in the evaluation of anemia in a large Australian referral centre.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2018Article
- Celiac disease: understanding the gluten-free diet.European journal of nutrition · 2017Review
- Early recognition of coeliac disease through community pharmacies: a proof of concept study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Article
- 'Pre-endoscopy point of care test (Simtomax- IgA/IgG-Deamidated Gliadin Peptide) for coeliac disease in iron deficiency anaemia: diagnostic accuracy and a cost saving economic model'.BMC gastroenterology · 2016Article
- Article
- Response to Marco-Marques et al.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine an effective diagnostic method of detecting all cases of coeliac disease in patients referred for gastroscopy without performing routine duodenal biopsy.
designAn initial retrospective cohort of patients attending for gastroscopy was analysed to derive a clinical decision tool that could increase the detection of coeliac disease without performing routine duodenal biopsy. The tool incorporated serology (measuring antibodies to tissue transglutaminase) and stratifying patients according to their referral symptoms (patients were classified as having a "high risk" or "low risk" of coeliac disease). The decision tool was then tested on a second cohort of patients attending for gastroscopy. In the second cohort all patients had a routine duodenal biopsy and serology performed.
settingTeaching hospital in Sheffield.
participants2000 consecutive adult patients referred for gastroscopy recruited prospectively.
main outcome measureEvaluation of a clinical decision tool using patients' referral symptoms, tissue transglutaminase antibody results, and duodenal biopsy results.
resultsNo cases of coeliac disease were missed by the pre-endoscopy testing algorithm. The prevalence of coeliac disease in patients attending for endoscopy was 3.9% (77/2000, 95% confidence interval 3.1% to 4.8%). The prevalence in the high risk and low risk groups was 9.6% (71/739, 7.7% to 12.0%) and 0.5% (6/1261, 0.2% to 1.0%). The prevalence of coeliac disease in patients who were negative for tissue transglutaminase antibody was 0.4% (7/2000). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for a positive antibody result to diagnose coeliac disease was 90.9%, 90.9%, 28.6%, and 99.6%, respectively. Evaluation of the clinical decision tool gave a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 100%, 60.8%, 9.3%, and 100%, respectively.
conclusionsPre-endoscopy serological testing in combination with biopsy of high risk cases detected all cases of coeliac disease. The use of this decision tool may enable the endoscopist to target patients who need a duodenal biopsy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.