SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Tools Used to Measure the Physical State of Women with Celiac Disease: A Review with a Systematic Approach.
Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Celiac disease (CD) is an immunological disorder that mainly affects the small intestine, generating an inflammatory process in response to the presence of gluten (a protein). Autoimmune diseases are part of a group of diseases that are difficult to diagnose without a specific protocol or consensus to detect them due to the number of symptoms and diseases with which it has a relationship. Therefore, the aim of this review was to analyze the diagnostic tools of CD used in middle-aged women, to compare the use and effectiveness of the different tools, and to propose a strategy for the use of the tools based on the results found in the literature. The present research followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. The search was conducted in the following databases: Scielo, PubMed, Web of Science, and Worldwide Science org. In the initial literature search, 2004 titles and relevant abstracts were found. Among them, 687 were duplicates, leaving 1130 articles. Based on the inclusion criteria, only 41 articles passed the selection process; 4 main types of analyses appear in the studies: blood tests, questionnaires, clinical history, and biopsy. It can be said that none of the analyses have a 100% reliability since most of them can present false negatives; therefore, the best way to diagnose celiac disease up to now is through a combination of different tests (Immunoglobulin A and small intestinal biopsy).
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.