Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32751809›Full record

ArticleNutrients2020

Celiac Dietary Adherence Test and Standardized Dietician Evaluation in Assessment of Adherence to a Gluten-Free Diet in Patients with Celiac Disease.

Katarzyna Gładyś, Jolanta Dardzińska, Marek Guzek, Krystian Adrych, Sylwia Małgorzewicz

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Dietary assessments in individuals living with coeliac disease: key considerations.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Global Approach to Follow-Up of Celiac Disease.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katarzyna GładyśDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, Medical University of Gdansk, Dębinki St. 7, 80-211 Gdańsk, Poland.
Jolanta DardzińskaDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, Medical University of Gdansk, Dębinki St. 7, 80-211 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7691-7788
Marek GuzekDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of Gdansk, Dębinki St. 7, 80-211 Gdańsk, Poland.
Krystian AdrychDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of Gdansk, Dębinki St. 7, 80-211 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6476-9095
Sylwia MałgorzewiczDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, Medical University of Gdansk, Dębinki St. 7, 80-211 Gdańsk, Poland.
Gdańsk Medical University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adherence to a gluten-free diet (GFD) is currently the mainstay of treatment strategy for celiac disease (CD). The aim of our study was measuring a GFD adherence in CD patients using two newly validated methods of dietary assessment-Standardized Dietician Evaluation (SDE) and the Celiac Dietary Adherence Test (CDAT). Ninety-two adults with CD were evaluated by a registered dietitian with extensive experience with the use of SDE and CDAT. Duodenal biopsy was performed and blood was drawn for serum anti-endomysial, anti-deamidated gliadin peptide and anti-tissue transglutaminase antibodies in forty four of those patients. The results of CDAT and SDE were very convergent, but SDE scores better correlated with serologic and histologic findings. As many as 24-52% of study participants did not adhere well enough to a GFD. Insufficient adherence to a GFD in CD patients is still a significant problem. The knowledge about gluten content in food ingredients and additives is very low among adults with CD. SDE is the most accurate method in assessing compliance with a GFD and is especially helpful in determining hidden sources of gluten. The CDAT may be a fast tool for screening for a GFD adherence in CD patients.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAutoantibodiesBiopsyCeliac DiseaseDiet, Gluten-FreeDiet SurveysDuodenumFemaleGliadinGTP-Binding ProteinsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient ComplianceAutoantibodiesGliadinGTP-Binding ProteinsProtein Glutamine gamma Glutamyltransferase 2Transglutaminasesadherence to a gluten-free dietdietitian assessmentrefractory celiac diseasestandardized dietary evaluation

Identifiers

PMID32751809
PMCPMC7468751
OpenAlexW3045809787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.