ArticleGut and liver2022
Seronegative Celiac Disease in Patients with Isolated Refractory Dyspepsia and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.
Article in Gut and liver, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The genetic association between celiac disease and risk of functional dyspepsia: A Mendelian randomization study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Risk of malignancy and surveillance of premalignant gastrointestinal lesions in adult celiac disease.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Seronegative refractory celiac disease complicated by severe malnutrition, duodenal ulceration, and thromboembolic events in a young male: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: To investigate the presence of seronegative celiac disease in patients with isolated refractory dyspepsia and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)-related complaints. Methods: This was a single-center, prospective study performed at a tertiary care referral hospital. Among 968 consecutive patients, 129 seronegative patients with tissue damage consistent with Marsh IIIa classification or above were included. The patients were divided into two groups: dyspepsia (n=78) and GERD (n=51). Biopsies were taken from the duodenum regardless of endoscopic appearance, and patients with Marsh IIIa or above damage were advised to consume a gluten-free diet. The Glasgow Dyspepsia Severity (GDS) score, Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), and Biagi score were calculated at baseline and every 3 months. Control endoscopy was performed every 6 months during follow-up. Results: The median follow-up time was 19.9 months (range, 6 to 24 months) in the dyspepsia group and 19.2 months (range, 6 to 24 months) in the GERD group. All the patients were positive for the Conclusions: Seronegative celiac disease may be considered in this group of patients. Even if a patient is seronegative and has normal endoscopic findings, duodenal biopsy should be considered.
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.