ArticleCellular & molecular immunology2011
A new algorithm for the diagnosis of celiac disease.
Article in Cellular & molecular immunology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Prevalence of Adult Celiac Disease in India: Regional Variations and Associations.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2016Article
- A Potential Link between Environmental Triggers and Autoimmunity.Autoimmune diseases · 2014Review
- The thrombophilic network of autoantibodies in celiac disease.BMC medicine · 2013Article
- Diagnosis of celiac disease.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Celiac disease (CD) affects at least 1% of the Western population but remains largely unrecognized. In our laboratory, we utilize a novel algorithm to diagnose pediatric CD that offers both high sensitivity and high specificity for diagnosis in an outpatient setting. The aim of the present study was to challenge this algorithm and to test its performance in children and adults suspected of having CD. Using a three-assay algorithm, screening with the most sensitive tissue transglutaminase (tTG) complexed with deamidated gliadin peptide neoepitope immunoglobulin A (IgA)+IgG assay and confirming with the two specific tTG IgA and tTG IgA+IgG assays, we examined the serological results from 112 children aged 0-17 years old and 60 adults in comparison to their respective biopsy results. The algorithm performance was calculated by statistical analysis. The use of the new algorithm enabled us to diagnose CD with 98% sensitivity, 93% specificity and 95% accuracy in the pediatric group and 94% sensitivity, 92% specificity and 93% accuracy in the total population studied. The false-negative cases in the adult group were attributed to previous adherence to a gluten-free diet, and the single false-negative result in a young child became a true positive after 6 months. We have also monitored three celiac patients before and after diagnosis and found that the algorithm may be suitable for disease monitoring. The newly proposed three-assay algorithm for celiac detection is very reliable in both children and adults. Due to the high performance of this assay, the further need for confirmatory intestinal biopsies will be reassessed.
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.