MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Screening for Celiac Disease in an IBS Population

2005· article· en· W2977954495 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allison R. Northcutt, Teresa B. Perschy, Vanessa Z. Ameen, Eric G. Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBloatingInternal medicinePlaceboPopulationSerologyGastroenterologyIrritable bowel syndromeAbdominal painDiseaseGluten freeConstipationDiarrheaImmunologyAntibodyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Celiac disease (CD) is a genetically predisposed immune-mediated disorder affecting primarily the GI tract and activated by ingestion of gluten contained in wheat, rye and barley. It may begin in childhood or adult life, and serologic studies indicate the prevalence is relatively common with estimates of 1% to 3% in the general population in Europe and the US. Symptoms are highly variable and may include abdominal pain, bloating, diarrhea, and constipation (1,2). Because these non-specific GI symptoms are also common features of IBS, CD may be undetected in an IBS population. Serologic markers suggestive of CD have been recommended for initial evaluation (1). Our aim was to identify IBS patients with possible celiac disease enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating a novel agent to treat IBS. Methods: Male and female patients ≥ 18 yrs with IBS per Rome II criteria were enrolled into an international placebo-controlled treatment trial of 8 weeks. All patients had a normal colon evaluation within 2 years of entering the study, and patients with known CD were excluded. During the 2-wk screening period for active IBS symptoms, patients had a serum sample analyzed for IgA antibodies to human TTG (tissue transglutaminase) using ELISA (Quest Diagnostics, Nichols Institute, Pharmacia/Scimedx Celikey TTG (IgA) antibody kit, sensitivity 96%, specificity 99%). A result of ≥ 5 units/ml was considered positive for purposes of excluding patients with possible CD from the treatment phase. Results: 1362 patients (1015/1362, 75% female) were enrolled into screening with the majority of patients coming from US, Canada, Germany, and Australia (1138/1362, 84%). IgA TTG antibody results were obtained for 1355 patients with 7 patients testing positive for CD: 6 females (4 white, 2 Hispanic) and 1 male (white). By history, 2 females were diarrhea-IBS and 1 female had constipation-IBS. Three females and 1 male had mixed diarrhea-constipation IBS. Conclusions: In this IBS population, IgA TTG antibody testing for CD suggests that the prevalence of CD in IBS (7/1355; 0.5%) is similar to the prevalence observed in general population studies. Cost of screening for CD in a clinical trial may not be justified given the small number of patients with possible CD. Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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