ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2021
Do gastroenterologists have medical inertia towards coeliac disease? A UK multicentre secondary care study.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- High prevalence of ultra-short celiac disease in children with low anti-tissue transglutaminase immunoglobulin A levels: The risk of misdiagnosis without bulb biopsy.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2026Observational
- Patient preferences for the diagnosis of coeliac disease: A discrete choice experiment.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Non-biopsy Strategy for the Diagnosis of Celiac Disease in Adults: A Narrative Review.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Coeliac Disease and Microscopic Colitis: The Largest Study Assessing Prognosis and Risk of Hospital Admission.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Cost-benefits and environmental impact of the no-biopsy approach for the diagnosis of coeliac disease in adults.Frontline gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of coeliac disease: a narrative review.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Review
- The Opinion of Polish Coeliac Patients on the Knowledge of Medical Professionals and Support Groups about Coeliac Disease-A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Burden of persistent symptoms in treated coeliac disease: cause, aftermath or merely association?BMJ open gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Why Is There Medical Inertia and Nihilism to Celiac Disease? Comment on Pivetta et al. In Elderly Anemic Patients without Endoscopic Signs of Bleeding Are Duodenal Biopsies Always Necessary to Rule out Celiac Disease?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical Manifestation and Diagnostic Process of Celiac Disease in Poland-Comparison of Pediatric and Adult Patients in Retrospective Study.Nutrients · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess if there is secondary care medical inertia towards coeliac disease (CD).
designGroup (1): Time from primary care presentation to diagnostic endoscopy was quantified in 151 adult patients with a positive endomysial antibody test and compared with 92 adult patients with histologically proven inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Group (2): Across four hospitals, duodenal biopsy reports for suspected CD were reviewed (n=1423). Group (3): Clinical complexity was compared between known CD (n=102) and IBD (n=99) patients at their respective follow-up clinic appointments. Group (4): 50 gastroenterologists were questioned about their perspective on CD and IBD.
resultsGroup (1): Suspected coeliac patients waited significantly longer for diagnostic endoscopy following referral (48.5 (28-89) days) than suspected patients with IBD (34.5 (18-70) days; p=0.003). Group (2): 1423 patients underwent diagnostic endoscopy for possible CD, with only 40.0% meeting guidelines to take four biopsies. Increased diagnosis of CD occurred if guidelines were followed (10.1% vs 4.6% p<0.0001). 12.4% of newly diagnosed CD patients had at least one non-diagnostic gastroscopy in the 5 years prior to diagnosis. Group (4): 32.0% of gastroenterologists failed to identify that CD has greater prevalence in adults than IBD. Moreover, 36.0% of gastroenterologists felt that doctors were not required for the management of CD.
conclusionProlonged waiting times for endoscopy and inadequacies in biopsy technique were demonstrated suggesting medical inertia towards CD. However, this has to be balanced against rationalising care accordingly. A Coeliac UK National Patient Charter may standardise care across the UK.
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.