Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36321689›Full record

SynthesisHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2022

Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac disease: systematic review and economic modelling.

Martha Mc Elwenspoek, Howard Thom, Athena L Sheppard, Edna Keeney, Rachel O'Donnell, Joni Jackson, Cristina Roadevin, Sarah Dawson, Deborah Lane, Jo Stubbs and 8 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Understanding the patient's experience of coeliac disease diagnosis: a qualitative interview study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

18 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Martha Mc ElwenspoekNational Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9824-9335
Howard ThomPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8576-5552
Athena L SheppardNational Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1564-0740
Edna KeeneyPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4763-8891
Rachel O'DonnellNational Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4354-8135
Joni JacksonNational Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2591-7395
Cristina RoadevinPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6279-6823
Sarah DawsonPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6682-063X
Deborah LanePatient representative, UK.
Jo StubbsPatient representative, UK.
Hazel EverittPrimary Care Research Centre, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7362-8403
Jessica C WatsonPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8177-6438
Alastair D HayPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3012-375X
Peter GillettPaediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Department, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2294-4478
Gerry RobinsDepartment of Gastroenterology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7249-4412
Hayley E JonesPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4265-2854
Sue MallettCentre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0596-8200
Penny F WhitingPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1138-5682
University of Bristol · GBUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Hospital for Sick Children · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Leicester · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1Medical Research Council MR/T044594/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoeliac disease is an autoimmune disorder triggered by ingesting gluten. It affects approximately 1% of the UK population, but only one in three people is thought to have a diagnosis. Untreated coeliac disease may lead to malnutrition, anaemia, osteoporosis and lymphoma.

objectivesThe objectives were to define at-risk groups and determine the cost-effectiveness of active case-finding strategies in primary care.

design(1) Systematic review of the accuracy of potential diagnostic indicators for coeliac disease. (2) Routine data analysis to develop prediction models for identification of people who may benefit from testing for coeliac disease. (3) Systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests for coeliac disease. (4) Systematic review of the accuracy of genetic tests for coeliac disease (literature search conducted in April 2021). (5) Online survey to identify diagnostic thresholds for testing, starting treatment and referral for biopsy. (6) Economic modelling to identify the cost-effectiveness of different active case-finding strategies, informed by the findings from previous objectives. DATA SOURCES: For the first systematic review, the following databases were searched from 1997 to April 2021: MEDLINE REVIEW

methodsFor review 1, cohort and case-control studies reporting on a diagnostic indicator in a population with and a population without coeliac disease were eligible. For review 2, diagnostic cohort studies including patients presenting with coeliac disease symptoms who were tested with serological tests for coeliac disease and underwent a duodenal biopsy as reference standard were eligible. In both reviews, risk of bias was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 tool. Bivariate random-effects meta-analyses were fitted, in which binomial likelihoods for the numbers of true positives and true negatives were assumed.

resultsPeople with dermatitis herpetiformis, a family history of coeliac disease, migraine, anaemia, type 1 diabetes, osteoporosis or chronic liver disease are 1.5-2 times more likely than the general population to have coeliac disease; individual gastrointestinal symptoms were not useful for identifying coeliac disease. For children, women and men, prediction models included 24, 24 and 21 indicators of coeliac disease, respectively. The models showed good discrimination between patients with and patients without coeliac disease, but performed less well when externally validated. Serological tests were found to have good diagnostic accuracy for coeliac disease. Immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase had the highest sensitivity and endomysial antibody the highest specificity. There was little improvement when tests were used in combination. Survey respondents ( LIMITATIONS: The interpretation of meta-analyses was limited by the substantial heterogeneity between the included studies, and most included studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. The main limitations of the prediction models were that we were restricted to diagnostic indicators that were recorded by general practitioners and that, because coeliac disease is underdiagnosed, it is also under-reported in health-care data. The cost-effectiveness model is a simplification of coeliac disease and modelled an average cohort rather than individuals. Evidence was weak on the probability of routine coeliac disease diagnosis, the accuracy of serological and genetic tests and the utility of a gluten-free diet.

conclusionsPopulation screening with immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase (1% pre-test probability) and of immunoglobulin A endomysial antibody followed by human leucocyte antigen testing or human leucocyte antigen testing followed by immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase with any pre-test probability appear to have similar cost-effectiveness results. As decisions to implement population screening cannot be made based on our economic analysis alone, and given the practical challenges of identifying patients with higher pre-test probabilities, we recommend that human leucocyte antigen combined with immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase testing should be considered for adults with at least a 1.5% pre-test probability of coeliac disease, equivalent to having at least one predictor. A more targeted strategy of 10% pre-test probability is recommended for children (e.g. children with anaemia). FUTURE WORK: Future work should consider whether or not population-based screening for coeliac disease could meet the UK National Screening Committee criteria and whether or not it necessitates a long-term randomised controlled trial of screening strategies. Large prospective cohort studies in which all participants receive accurate tests for coeliac disease are needed. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019115506 and CRD42020170766.

fundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in

Indexed as

Celiac DiseaseOsteoporosisSkin NeoplasmsAdultChildFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin ALongitudinal StudiesMaleProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUnited StatesImmunoglobulin ABIOPSYCHILDRENCOELIAC DISEASECOST-EFFECTIVENESSDIAGNOSTIC TESTSECONOMIC MODELSGLUTEN-FREE DIETIMMUNOGLOBULIN A ANTI TISSUE TRANSGLUTAMINASEIMMUNOGLOBULIN A ENDOMYSIAL ANTIBODIESPRIMARY CARERISK FACTORSSURVEY

Identifiers

PMID36321689
PMCPMC9638887
OpenAlexW4307920526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.