Routine duodenal biopsies to diagnose celiac disease.

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.

1. The Impact of a Gluten-Free Diet on Celiac Disease: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Two Cases Using NIH Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMIS, NTCB, and Neuro-QoL).Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2020
   Article
2. Correlation of TTG IgA Level with Small Intestinal Histopathological Changes for Celiac Disease among Adult Saudi Patients.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2020
   Article
3. Diagnosing coeliac disease: Out with the old and in with the new?World journal of gastroenterology · 2020
   Review
4. Automated Detection of Celiac Disease on Duodenal Biopsy Slides: A Deep Learning Approach.Journal of pathology informatics · 2019
   Article
5. Diagnostic yield of endoscopic markers for celiac disease.Journal of medicine and life
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as