Celiac disease. CME update for family physicians.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review current understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of celiac disease. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: Few recent randomized controlled trials (level I evidence) have studied treatments for celiac disease. There are recent comparative studies (level II evidence) and there is well established consensus (level III evidence) on diagnosis and treatment of celiac disease. MAIN MESSAGE: Celiac disease is an immune-mediated small bowel enteropathy caused by exposure to wheat gluten protein. The disease can be insidious and often presents with only subtle extraintestinal manifestations in a variety of organ systems. Recent epidemiologic surveys suggest celiac disease is much more common in North America than previously thought. Advances in immunology and screening have made diagnosis more reliable than in the past. Removing gluten from the diet is effective in most cases. CONCLUSION: Celiac disease manifests subtly and is an easy diagnosis to miss. Good laboratory screening tests and effective treatment are available. Family practitioners should consider celiac disease in patients who present with confounding symptoms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.083 | 0.024 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".