ArticleEClinicalMedicine2026
Generalisability of an adult-trained AI model to paediatric coeliac disease diagnosis: a multicentre external validation study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coeliac disease diagnosis on duodenal biopsies is limited by interobserver variability. We have previously demonstrated pathologist-level performance with our artificial intelligence (AI) model for the histopathological diagnosis of adult coeliac disease, but not in paediatric practice. As paediatric coeliac disease screening programmes expand internationally, accurate and scalable diagnostic tools are needed. We investigated whether an AI model trained exclusively on adult whole-slide images (WSIs) can generalise to paediatric coeliac disease diagnosis across independent centres. Methods: A training and validation dataset of 9958 WSIs from 8421 adult patients (961 coeliac disease; collected Jan 1, 2014, to March 31, 2025) from five centres was used to develop an ensemble of multiple-instance learning models using features from a foundation model. Testing was performed on 708 consecutive paediatric patients (86 with coeliac disease) from two centres (Edinburgh and Southampton) not included in training. Model calibration was assessed, and probability outputs were grouped into clinically interpretable categories. Findings: In adult cross-validation, the AI model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 99.1% (95% CI 98.9-99.4), sensitivity of 89.3% (87.2-91.1), specificity of 98.8% (98.5-99.0), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.6% (98.3-98.9). On testing (paediatric) datasets, performance remained high (AUC 98.8%, 95% CI 98.2-99.4; sensitivity 80.2%, 70.6-87.3; specificity 98.4%, 97.1-99.1; NPV 97.3%, 95.7-98.3). Restricting analysis to predictions outside the intermediate-probability range (predicted coeliac disease probability <10% or ≥65%; 604 [85.3%] of 708 cases) improved sensitivity to 100% (95% CI 93.7-100.0) and specificity to 98.7% (97.4-99.4). No misclassifications were observed among high-confidence predictions (<2% or ≥85%; 467 [66.0%] of 708 cases). The expected calibration error was 0.03. Performance improved significantly when biopsies from both duodenal sites (bulb [D1] and descending [D2/3]) were considered. Interpretation: Our AI model, trained on adult biopsies, generalises to paediatric coeliac disease diagnosis across centres and scanner platforms. Well calibrated probability outputs provide clinically interpretable measures of diagnostic confidence and could support safe identification of coeliac disease-negative biopsies within defined thresholds. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of applying adult-derived AI models in paediatric populations and reinforce the importance of multi-site (D1 & D2) biopsy sampling. Funding: The National Institute for Health and Care Research.
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.