A23 NUTRITIONAL DEFICIENCIES ARE FREQUENT IN CELIAC PATIENTS ON A GLUTEN-FREE DIET, REGARDLESS OF THE DURATION AND COMPLIANCE OF THE DIET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The only available treatment for celiac disease (CD) is adherence to a strict gluten-free diet (GFD). CD is associated with several nutritional deficiencies, which could be explained by malabsorption when the disease is active. However, the magnitude of nutritional deficiencies in treated CD and how this is influenced by the duration and compliance of GFD is less clear. Aims We aim to evaluate the presence of nutritional deficiencies in celiac patients on short term (≤2yrs) vs long-term (>2yrs) GFD, and in those with persistent symptoms or asymptomatic in the follow up. Methods We included consecutive biopsy-proven CD patients attending the McMaster Adult Celiac Clinic. GFD adherence was assessed by validated Celiac Dietary Adherence Test (CDAT) and by anti-tissue transglutaminase antibody IgA(tTG IgA) levels. Serology, vitamins and minerals were measured in blood samples collected at enrolment. Continuous data was expressed as Median (IQR) and categorical data as proportion%. Mann-U-Whitney and Chi2 were used to compare difference between groups. Results We enrolled 171 CD patients (80% female; Median age 43 years). 76/171 (44%) of CD patients were following a GFD for over 2 years. Eighty-two percent of the patients (141/171) had persistent symptoms in the follow up and 80.7% had normal tTG IgA levels. The most common nutritional abnormalities were deficiencies in zinc (56%), iron (23%), copper (20%). Chromium was increased in 74% of patients. There were no differences in nutritional deficiencies between group of patients with short and long-term duration of GFD, nor between those strictly compliant with GFD compared to those fairly compliant (p>0.05). Conclusions Nutritional deficiencies are frequent in celiac patients on a GFD regardless of the presence of symptoms, dietary compliance or duration. The previous suggest that nutrients deficiencies may be more related to GFD nutritional inadequacy rather than malabsorption. Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".