ArticleJournal of clinical gastroenterology2018
Determinants of Patient Satisfaction in Celiac Disease Care.
Article in Journal of clinical gastroenterology, 2018. 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.
- Quality of life in adults with celiac disease in Spain over a decade.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Gluten-free diet adherence in children with screening-detected celiac disease using a prospective birth cohort study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Assessment of the Level of Satisfaction with Medical Care of Patients Treated in Osteoporosis Clinics as an Indicator of the Quality of Medical Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Symptom Severity, Mood, and Healthcare Use Are Associated With Satisfaction in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2020Article
- Patient Perspectives on the Long-term Management of Celiac Disease.Journal of clinical gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and goalsThere are little data examining patient satisfaction with celiac disease (CD) care. We sought to assess how satisfied patients are with their CD care, and to determine the influencing factors. STUDY: We distributed an online questionnaire to adults receiving programmatic updates from a CD referral center, querying aspects of CD care and using disease-specific validated instruments to measure quality of life and dietary adherence. The univariable and multivariable analyses were performed using satisfaction as a binary outcome comparing grouped "satisfied" and "very satisfied" respondents to "neutral," "dissatisfied," and "very dissatisfied" respondents.
resultsThree hundred eighty-seven (22%) individuals completed the survey, and 229 met the inclusion criteria of biopsy-proven CD. Seventy-nine individuals (34.5%) reported being "very satisfied" with their CD care, 82 (35.8%) "satisfied," 46 (20.1%) "neutral," 14 (6.1%) "dissatisfied," and 8 (3.5%) "very dissatisfied." On multivariable analysis, reporting that physicians spend ample time managing CD needs (P=0.013), and having CD-antibody levels checked yearly (P=0.003), were positive predictors of patient satisfaction. Factors that were not correlated with patient satisfaction included symptom severity (P=0.268), quality of life (P=0.13), and following with a CD specialist (P=0.139).
conclusionsThe majority of patients we surveyed were satisfied with their CD care. We found that patients report higher satisfaction when they feel physicians spend time caring for their CD needs and when they receive annual CD-antibody testing. On the basis of our study, these factors are more important than disease severity, seeing a CD specialist, and quality of life in determining patient satisfaction with CD care.
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.