SynthesisSaudi medical journal2019
Celiac disease in type 1 diabetes mellitus in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Characterization and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Saudi medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of Celiac Disease in China Among High-Risk Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of digestive diseasesPooled it
- Clinical Characteristics and Prevalence of Celiac Disease in a Large Cohort of Type 1 Diabetes from Saudi Arabia.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Epidemiology of Celiac Disease in Western Iran during 2019-2021.BioMed research international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo characterize and meta-analyze the pertinent studies concerning celiac disease (CD) among patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: Data (from the relevant articles) were analyzed using both the Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) program and the comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) program. This study was conducted between March and July 2018 at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Written ethical approval was not obtained because this study was a retrospective literature review and analysis. Results: The prevalence of seropositive-CD was 15.88% with high heterogeneity (I2=84.0), while the prevalence of biopsy-proven CD was 12% with high heterogeneity (I2=82.7). Anti-transglutaminase was used in 7 of the 8 studies; alone in 4; with endomysial antibodies in 2; and with antigliadin antibodies (AGA) in one. In the remaining study, antireticulin antibodies was used with AGA. The age of the involved patients ranged from 8 months to 50 years old. Conclusion: The prevalence of biopsy-proven CD among T1DM patients in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (12.0%) was double the global prevalence (6.0%), and much higher than the normal Saudi population (1.4%). The female-to-male ratio (2:1) of CD patients in T1DM was the same as in the normal population in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. No significant difference was detected between the reported serologically-proven rates and the reported biopsy-proven rates (p=0.093).
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.