ArticleClinical nutrition ESPEN2020
Can individuals with celiac disease identify gluten-free foods correctly?
Article in Clinical nutrition ESPEN, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing a Measure to Assess General Knowledge for Coeliac Disease.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- An integrated nutritional and performance monitoring framework for athletes with celiac disease: A structured narrative review.Current research in food science · 2026Review
- Article
- Dietary assessments in individuals living with coeliac disease: key considerations.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Review
- Assessment of a training course for cookery students regarding celiac disease and gluten-free diet.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Beyond the gluten-free diet: Innovations in celiac disease therapeutics.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Against the Grain: Consumer's Purchase Habits and Satisfaction with Gluten-Free Product Offerings in European Food Retail.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- A Systematic Review of Tools to Assess Coeliac Disease-Related Knowledge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Gluten-Free Product Recalls and Their Impact on Consumer Trust.Nutrients · 2023Article
- New Developments in Celiac Disease Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Comparative study of physicochemical, nutritional, phytochemical, and sensory properties of bread with plantain and soy flours partly replacing wheat flour.Food science & nutrition · 2022Article
- Eating Competence and Aspects Related to a Gluten-Free Diet in Brazilian Adults with Gluten-Related Disorders.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Challenges of Monitoring the Gluten-Free Diet Adherence in the Management and Follow-Up of Patients with Celiac Disease.Nutrients · 2021Review
- Properties of Peanut (KAC431) Protein Hydrolysates and Their Impact on the Quality of Gluten-Free Rice Bread.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimsPatients with celiac disease (CD) often report inadvertent gluten exposures and challenges reading labels. The most common cause of non-responsive CD is gluten exposure. We aimed to assess whether recently diagnosed CD patients can determine whether a food is gluten-free based on labeling, and to assess skills over time. A secondary aim was to identify factors associated with label reading proficiency.
methodsInception cohort with follow-up at 6, 12, and 24 months after diagnosis. Participants were asked to determine whether 25 food items were gluten-free based on labeling information. Diet adherence was assessed using the Celiac Diet Assessment Tool (CDAT) and the Gluten-Free Eating Assessment Tool (GF-EAT). 144 adults with newly diagnosed celiac disease were enrolled. The initial quiz at 6 months was completed by 83%. Quizzes were completed by 72% at 12 months and 70% at 24 months.
resultsMedian overall accuracy scores were: 23/25, 24/25 and 21/25 at 6, 12 and 24 months respectively. Gluten-free products with explicit "gluten-free" claims had the fewest errors. Quiz scores were not correlated with tTG IgA levels, or CDAT or GF-EAT scores. Diet adherence was generally good (>85% with CDAT <13 suggesting adequate GFD adherence); however, at 24 months, only 11% reported no gluten exposure.
conclusionsCD patients may be unable to consistently choose gluten-free foods based on product labeling. Explicit identification of gluten-free products may be helpful. Label reading ability appears stable over time. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether erroneous label reading or misleading labels are associated with persistent villous atrophy.
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.