Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28069744›Full record

ArticlePostgraduate medical journal2017

Coeliac disease screening is suboptimal in a tertiary gastroenterology setting.

Heba Iskandar, Darrell M Gray, Hongha Vu, Faiz Mirza, Mary Katherine Rude, Kara Regan, Adil Abdalla, Srinivas Gaddam, Sami Almaskeen, Michael Mello and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Postgraduate medical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Diagnosis and Treatment Patterns in Celiac Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019
    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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Heba IskandarDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Darrell M GrayDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Hongha VuDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Faiz MirzaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Mary Katherine RudeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Kara ReganDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Adil AbdallaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Srinivas GaddamDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Sami AlmaskeenDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Michael MelloDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Evelyn MarquezDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Claire MeyerDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Ahmed BolkhirDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Navya KanuriDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Gregory SayukDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
C Prakash GyawaliDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USJohn Cochran VA Medical Center · USThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · US

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
CLINICAL/LABORATORY TRAINING ACADEMIC GASTROENTEROLOGYT32DK007130 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI MATTHEW AARON CIORBA · 1986 to 2026
$8.3M
Influence of Somatization on Central Pain Responses in Irritable Bowel SyndromeK23DK084113 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI SAYUK, GREGORY S · 2010 to 2014
$827k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK084113NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007130
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsCoeliac disease (CD) is widely prevalent in North America, but case-finding techniques currently used may not be adequate for patient identification. We aimed to determine the adequacy of CD screening in an academic gastroenterology (GI) practice.

methodsConsecutive initial visits to a tertiary academic GI practice were surveyed over a 3-month period as a fellow-initiated quality improvement project. All electronic records were reviewed to look for indications for CD screening according to published guidelines. The timing of screening was noted (before or after referral), as well as the screening method (serology or biopsy). Data were analysed to compare CD screening practices across subspecialty clinics.

results616 consecutive patients (49±0.6 years, range 16-87 years, 58.5% females, 94% Caucasian) fulfilled inclusion criteria. CD testing was indicated in 336 (54.5%), but performed in only 145 (43.2%). The need for CD screening was highest in luminal GI and inflammatory bowel disease clinics, followed by biliary and hepatology clinics (p<0.0001); CD screening rate was highest in the luminal GI clinic (p=0.002). Of 145 patients screened, 4 patients (2.4%) had serology consistent with CD, of which 2 were proven by duodenal biopsy. Using this proportion, an additional 5 patients might have been diagnosed in 191 untested patients with indications for CD screening.

conclusionsMore than 50% of patients in a tertiary GI clinic have indications for CD screening, but <50% of indicated cases are screened. Case-finding techniques therefore are suboptimal, constituting a gap in patient care and an important target for future quality improvement initiatives.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiopsyCeliac DiseaseFemaleGastroenterologyHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorth AmericaPrevalenceSerologic Tests

Identifiers

PMID28069744
PMCPMC5503792
OpenAlexW2570391874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.