MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prevalence of IgA-antiendomysial antibody in asymptomatic low bone mineral density

2001· article· en· W2006176662 on OpenAlexaff
Kieren J. Mather, Jon Meddings, Paul L. Beck, R. Brent Scott, David A. Hanley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticInternal medicineSerologyBone mineralGastroenterologyPhysical examinationOutpatient clinicAntibodyOsteoporosisImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Celiac disease (CD) is a relatively common gastrointestinal disorder that can be asymptomatic. However, even among asymptomatic patients a long-term reduction in bone mineral density (BMD) is found. Excellent noninvasive screening tests for CD are now available. Studies using older screening techniques have suggested a 10-fold increased prevalence of CD among patients with low BMD, but this has not been confirmed with current testing methodology. We set out to confirm these prevalence estimates using antiendomysial antibody testing. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients referred to our outpatient endocrinology clinic for evaluation of idiopathic low BMD were studied. In addition to the routine evaluation, patients completed a symptom questionnaire and underwent serological testing for the presence of the IgA antiendomysial antibody (EMA). All patients with a positive EMA underwent small bowel biopsy and permeability studies. RESULTS: EMA results were available on 96 patients; 78/96 patients were female and the mean age was 57 yr (range 18-86 yr). Seven of 96 (7.3% [95% CI 2.1-12.5%]) were EMA-positive, but all tests were low titer (< or = 1:20). However, none of the biopsies showed any histopathological features of CD, nor did EMA status correlate with any of the clinical or laboratory features assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high rate of weakly positive antibody tests, our data do not support an increased prevalence of CD among asymptomatic patients referred for evaluation of low BMD. Without an increase over the background prevalence, the high cost of EMA testing argues against routine use of this test for screening of this population.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of GastroenterologySame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207