ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Challenges in the Pediatric Celiac Disease Diagnosis: An Up-to-Date Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mass Screening Strategies for Celiac Disease in Apparently Healthy Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- Celiac Disease Management in School Environments: An Interdisciplinary Narrative Review of Operational, Psychosocial, and Nutritional Barriers.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Nutritional status in pediatric celiac disease: evaluation at diagnosis and during follow-up.BMC nutrition · 2026Article
- Review
- Exploring Tissue Transglutaminase Antibodies as a Confirmatory Tool for Diagnosing Coeliac Disease in Children.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Gluten-related nutritional challenges in pediatric subjects: treatment and beyond.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Celiac disease (CD) is an autoimmune disorder that affects genetically susceptible individuals, characterized by specific serological and histological features, and is triggered by the consumption of gluten. The current diagnosis is based on the demonstration of intestinal damage in small bowel biopsies, as well as the serological presence of CD-specific antibodies (usually IgA) against tissue transglutaminase (tTG), deamidated gliadin peptides (DGP), and endomysium (EMA). The European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN), in the 2020 updated guidelines, states that the diagnosis of CD in children and adolescents can be established without a biopsy if they have IgA tTG2 >10 ULN confirmed by positive IgA endomysial antibodies on two separate blood tests. Challenges, though, arise in serological and clinical diagnosis: in several cases false-positive results are observed. False-negative serological tests may also occur in children < 2 years of age, in patients adhering to a gluten-free diet, in individuals on immunosuppressive therapy, in cases of selective IgA deficiency, and finally due to potential laboratory errors. CD has a wide range of clinical manifestations, either gastrointestinal or extraintestinal. However, CD may be clinically silent and diagnosed through screening. Delayed diagnosis and treatment can lead to serious complications. Therefore, understanding and awareness of these challenges is imperative. Hence, the aim of this review is to highlight the diagnostic challenges of celiac disease in children and adolescents and stress the importance of prompt recognition in order to ensure appropriate management and prevention of complications.
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.