A67 ABC, EASY AS 123, SIMPLE AS GLUTEN-FREE? KNOWLEDGE AND ADHERENCE IN ADOLESCENTS WITH CELIAC DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Research shows that adolescents with celiac disease (CeD) are at great risk for non-adherence to the gluten-free diet (GFD), and that knowledge of the GFD may play a role in adherence. Aims The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationship between patient knowledge and adherence to the GFD in a local population of adolescents with CeD. Secondary objectives were to identify information sources used to learn about the GFD, and compare adolescent and parent knowledge of the GFD. Methods Adolescents with CeD (12–17 years) were recruited at pediatric gastroenterology clinics in Calgary, Alberta. Preliminary data was collected October 2020 to August 2021. Both the adolescent and a parent were asked to complete a 5 minute online survey received via email. Survey measures included a validated adherence scale (Biagi score) and a unique knowledge assessment (GFD-Q), adapted from a previously published questionnaire. GFD-Q scores were categorized as “sufficient knowledge” based on correctly identifying 3/3 gluten-containing foods, at least 4/7 of gluten-free foods, and at least 4/7 foods that may contain gluten. Respondents submitted demographic and clinical information, as well as reviewed information sources used to learn about the GFD. Results Initial data were reviewed for 25 participant pairs (adolescent with respective parent), with a planned sample size of 40 participant pairs. Most adolescents (96%) reported adherence to the GFD (Biagi score of 3 or 4). Eleven (44%) adolescents had sufficient knowledge of the GFD. About 90% of adolescents correctly identified which foods to question, however, 20% did not correctly identify a gluten-containing food (namely malt), and 36% did not identify most gluten-free foods (such as maltodextrin and balsamic vinegar). Parents scored higher on the GFD-Q with 17/25 (68%) demonstrating sufficient knowledge. Interestingly, of the 11 adolescents with sufficient knowledge, 10/11 (91%) respective parents also had sufficient knowledge. Most adolescents and parents identified the gastroenterologist, another individual with CeD, and Google as helpful information sources. Adolescents also indicated their parents were a helpful information source. Conclusions While the study is still enrolling to reach sample size, we acknowledge that most adolescents in our study report being adherent to the GFD. However, their reported knowledge is variable, especially in knowing which foods are safe to eat. Thus, education should also focus as much on which foods to avoid, as well as safe foods to consume. Parent knowledge of the GFD may have a role in adolescent knowledge. At study completion, descriptive statistics will be used to examine participant characteristics and identify trends to assist in the development of future health education for adolescents with CeD. Funding Agencies Canadian Celiac Association - James A.Campbell Research Fund
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".