Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28067892›Full record

ArticleNutrition & diabetes2017

Impact of type 1 diabetes mellitus and celiac disease on nutrition and quality of life.

J G Nunes-Silva, V S Nunes, R P Schwartz, S Mlss Trecco, D Evazian, M L Correa-Giannella, M Nery, M S Queiroz

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrition & diabetes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05530070 (Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Coeliac Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05530070 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Coeliac Disease: a Series of Studies

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PecsRan2022 to 2026Enrolled190ConditionsCoeliac DiseaseArmsDietary intervention, Standard of care, Cardiovascular risk-related parameters
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Coeliac disease: complications and comorbidities.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. An Overview of Celiac Disease in Childhood Type 1 Diabetes.International journal of endocrinology and metabolism · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

J G Nunes-SilvaNutrition and Dietetics Division, Central Institute of Clinics Hospital, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
V S NunesLipids Laboratory (LIM-10), Endocrinology and Metabolism Division of Hospital das Clinicas, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Sao Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
R P SchwartzRadiology Institute of Clinics Hospital, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
S Mlss TreccoNutrition and Dietetics Division, Central Institute of Clinics Hospital, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
D EvazianNutrition and Dietetics Division, Central Institute of Clinics Hospital, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
M L Correa-GiannellaCellular and Molecular Endocrinology Laboratory (LIM-18), University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
M NeryEndocrinology Division, Internal Medicine Department, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
M S QueirozEndocrinology Division, Internal Medicine Department, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveType 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and celiac disease (CD) are autoimmune diseases and have similar genetic patterns. T1DM treatment is based on diet, physical activity and insulin therapy, whereas CD depends on dietary changes with restriction of wheat, rye and barley. The aim of the study was to evaluate the quality of life (QoL) of individuals with the association of T1DM and CD, to characterize their nutritional status and to compare it with those with only one disease and healthier controls. SUBJECTS/

methodsSixty patients controlled by sex, age and body mass index (BMI) were stratified by previous diagnosis in: T1DM and CD (DMCD group); T1DM (DM group); CD (CD group); or healthy participants (HC). The SF-36 questionnaire was applied to assess psychological well being and results were compared with glycemic control and presence of complications related to diabetes, adhesion to gluten-free diet (GFD). Nutritional status and body mass composition were determined by BMI, waist circumference, bioimpedance, general laboratory tests and whole-body densitometry.

resultsThe time of diagnosis of T1DM was similar between DMCD and DM groups; however, the duration of CD was significantly higher in the CD group compared with DMCD. The SF-36 analysis revealed statistically significant differences between DM and HC groups in two domains: general health (P=0.042) and energy/vitality (P=0.012). QoL was also correlated with compliance to a GFD, and scores were similar in both groups: DMCD and CD. Forty percent of individuals in the CD group had visceral fat area above 100 cm

conclusionsIndividuals of DMCD group had similar scores to DM, CD and HC on QoL, as well as on their nutritional status and bone metabolism. Thereby, we should conclude that the association of T1DM and CD did not deteriorate their health status.

Indexed as

Nutritional StatusPersonal SatisfactionAdultBlood GlucoseBody Mass IndexCeliac DiseaseDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diet, Gluten-FreeFemaleHumansMaleMental HealthMiddle AgedPatient ComplianceQuality of LifeYoung AdultBlood Glucose

Identifiers

PMID28067892
PMCPMC5301040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.