Living gluten‐free: adherence, knowledge, lifestyle adaptations and feelings towards a gluten‐free diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A gluten-free diet (GFD) requires tremendous dedication, involving substantive changes to diet and lifestyle that may have a significant impact upon quality of life. The present study aimed io assess dietary adherence, knowledge of a GFD, and the emotional and lifestyle impact of a GFD. METHODS: Community dwelling adults following a GFD completed a questionnaire with items related to reasons for avoiding gluten, diagnostic testing, GFD adherence, knowledge and sources of information about a GFD, the Work and Social Adjustment Scale, and the effect of a GFD diet on lifestyle, feelings and behaviours. RESULTS: Strict GFD adherence among the 222 coeliac disease (CD) patients was 56%. Non-CD individuals (n = 38) were more likely to intentionally ingest gluten (odds ratio = 3.7; 95% confidence interval = 1.4-9.4). The adverse impact of a GFD was modest but most pronounced in the social domain. Eating shifted from the public to the domestic sphere and there were feelings of social isolation. Affective responses reflected resilience because acceptance and relief were experienced more commonly than anxiety or anger. Non-CD respondents were less knowledgeable and less likely to consult health professionals. They experienced less anger and depression and greater pleasure in eating than CD respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The findings obtained in the present suggest there is good potential for positive adaptation to the demands of a GFD; nevertheless, there is a measurable degree of social impairment that merits further study. The GFD may be a viable treatment option for conditions other than CD; however, education strategies regarding the need for diagnostic testing to exclude CD are required.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".