Observational studyItalian journal of pediatrics2024
New and old criteria for diagnosing celiac disease: do they really differ? A retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Italian journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- One threshold does not fit all: assay-specific validation of anti-tTG IgA tests for biopsy-free diagnosis of pediatric celiac disease.Immunologic research · 2026Article
- Autoimmune polyglandular syndrome among Chinese celiac disease patients: a survey of 243 individuals in China.Frontiers in immunology · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to compare two groups of celiac patients: the first one, in which diagnosis was based on a "biopsy sparing" approach according to the 2012 ESPGHAN criteria, and the second one, based on the biopsy approach like the one of the 1991 Revised Criteria, in order to find relevant difference for sex, M/F ratio, age at diagnosis, clinical features at the onset, presence and prevalence of concomitant autoimmune disorders.
methodsOur study involves 61 patients having the Celiac Disease (CD) onset from February 2013 to February 2020. The 32 patients who received diagnosis according "biopsy sparing" criteria were enrolled in group (1) The 29 patients who received diagnosis by duodenal biopsy were enrolled in group (2) Prevalence of comorbidities was analysed through chi-square test.
resultsIn group 1 the prevalence of comorbidities such as Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (IDDM) and thyroiditis was of 53%, while in group 2 it was only of 24%. Analysing the IDDM prevalence between the two groups we found a relevant difference. At the same time, the prevalence of thyroiditis was also significantly different. In group 1, male patients, in particular, would seem to have a higher incidence of CD related autoimmune disorders.
conclusionsAn increased prevalence of IDDM, thyroiditis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in the first group would show that the "biopsy sparing" approach could expose patients to a greater length of disease activity that might be responsible for the onset of such comorbidities. Further studies should be carried out on more numerous samples of patients in order to confirm or not these 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.