ArticleBMJ open2020
Strength of the association between Turner syndrome and coeliac disease: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of Celiac Disease in Patients With Turner Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Orphan Drugs and Diseases: A Systematic Review.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCoeliac disease (CD) is a genetic autoimmune disorder characterised by a permanent sensitivity to the gluten contained in some grains. Certain patient groups are considered high risk for the development of CD, including, but not limited to, those with chromosomal disorders such as Turner syndrome (TS). Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis that aims to comprehensively summarise the literature, and quantitatively estimate the weighted strength of the association between TS and CD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015 guidelines. We will search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase databases for relevant articles. Variant and broad search terms will be selected for identifying epidemiological studies reporting on the crude and/or adjusted association between TS and CD. Retrieved citations will be screened, and data from the eligible research reports against specific eligibility criteria will be extracted. We will then assess the risk of bias associated with the eligible studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The overall weighted strength of the pooled association will be quantified using the random-effects model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will use data from published literature; hence, ethical approval will not be needed. The resulting review will be the first to produce a comprehensive synthesis of the strength of the association between TS and CD. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal as well as in local and international conferences and symposiums. Results dissemination would help healthcare providers and policy-makers to make informed decisions regarding the diagnosis and management of CD in high-risk individuals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019131881, dated 3 September 2019.
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.