Effect of a Gluten-free Diet on Quality of Life in Patients With Nonclassical Versus Classical Presentations of Celiac Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Celiac disease (CD) often presents with symptoms of diarrhea and malabsorption, termed classical CD. However, it can also present as nonclassical CD, which is commonly associated with nongastrointestinal symptoms. Studies suggest that nonclassical CD tends to have less severe symptoms than classical CD, which may affect both adherence to a gluten-free diet (GFD) and psychological stress. Therefore, we compared adherence to a GFD and psychological measures, including quality of life (QOL) and somatization, between patients with nonclassical and classical presentations of CD. METHODS: Patients at a tertiary care center with biopsy-proven CD, who completed a Talley Bowel Disease Questionnaire and the Short Form-36 at diagnosis and who had been on a GFD for at least 1 year, were included in this study. Patients were further surveyed to assess gastrointestinal symptoms, QOL, Somatization Symptom Checklist (SSC), and adherence to a GFD. Results were compared between patients with classical versus nonclassical CD presentation. RESULTS: Among 122 patients included in this study, 62 had classical CD and 60 had nonclassical CD. At diagnosis, health-related QOL was lower in the classical CD group than in the nonclassical CD group. After following a GFD, both groups had improved QOL after following a GFD, and body mass index significantly increased in both groups. Most subscales of QOL, SSC scores, and adherence to the GFD were similar between the groups, except the Short Form-36 Mental Component summary scores that were still lower in the classical CD (48.4 vs. 52.6 nonclassical CD group; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Despite QOL at diagnosis being higher in those with nonclassical CD versus lower in those with classical CD, both groups had improved QOL and achieved a similar QOL after following a GFD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".