SynthesisHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2022
Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac disease: systematic review and economic modelling.
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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mass Screening Strategies for Celiac Disease in Apparently Healthy Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Routine Monitoring of Long-Term Conditions in Primary Care: Informing Decision Modelling with a Systematic Review in Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of gluten-free diet on autoimmune thyroiditis progression in patients with no symptoms or histology of celiac disease: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Pooled it
- Linkage between HLA-B8 and HLA-DQ2.5 contributes to ancestry-dependent risk for celiac disease.Journal of human immunity · 2026Article
- Linkage between HLA-B8 and HLA-DQ2.5 Contributes to Ancestry-Dependent Genetic Risk for Celiac Disease.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Association Between Parents' Self-Perceived Oral Health Knowledge and the Presence of Dental Caries in Their Children.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- The endonasal endoscopic surgical approach to challenging pediatric frontal sinus inflammatory lesions.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Bridging the Gap: Awareness, Knowledge, and Challenges of Living with Celiac Disease in Bulgaria.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Celiac Disease, Gluten-Free Diet, and Eating Disorders: From Bench to Bedside.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Exploring factors influencing quality of life variability among individuals with coeliac disease: an online survey.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Non-classical Celiac Disease as an Unrecognized Cause for Post-operative Knee Swelling following Patellofemoral Arthroplasty: A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2023Article
- Coeliac Disease Case-Control Study: Has the Time Come to Explore beyond Patients at Risk?Nutrients · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.