SynthesisPloS one2023
Celiac disease and COVID-19 in adults: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Socioeconomic, lifestyle and clinical determinants of health-related quality of life in adults with celiac disease: a national cross-sectional study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- The impact of lactose intolerance diagnosis: costs, timing, and quality-of-life.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Examination of eating attitudes and symptoms of orthorexia nervosa in adolescents with and without celiac disease.Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCeliac disease (CD) is an autoimmune disease affecting around 1.4% of the total human population. Local and systemic manifestations are described in CD. Viral infections seem to trigger CD or even have a worse outcome in CD patients. The evidence on the relationship between CD and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is limited. To evaluate existing evidence on the association between CD and COVID-19, we conducted the current systematic review.
methodsWe systematically searched Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase databases to find articles that reported risks or outcomes of COVID-19 in CD patients. Papers in any language published up to November 17, 2022, were evaluated for possible inclusion. The results were analyzed qualitatively. This study is registered with PROSPERO(CRD42022327380).
resultsWe identified 509 studies by searching databases; 14 reported data on the risk or outcome of COVID-19 in CD patients and were eligible for qualitative synthesis. We found that the relative risk of acquiring COVID-19 in CD patients may be lower than in the general population. Approximately 90% of infected patients were treated as an outpatient, and 10% were hospitalized. GFD adherence and Health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) were more or less the same before and during the pandemic. The gluten-free products (GFP) supply seems to be plunged during the pandemic. The data on the psychological effects of the pandemic were conflicting.
conclusionThe risk of acquiring COVID-19 in CD patients is lower than in the general population. Females were more likely to be infected by COVID-19, and the most common comorbidity in infected patients was a chronic lower respiratory disease; around 10% of infected patients needed hospitalization, GFD adherence, and HR-QOL was more or less the same before and during the pandemic, depression, anxiety, and stress levels of patients varied among studies. Patients had more difficulties accessing GFPs based on limited data.
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.