Gluten‐Free Diet Knowledge and Adherence in Adolescents with Celiac Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study examined the relationship between knowledge of, and adherence to, the gluten-free diet (GFD) in a local population of adolescents with celiac disease (CD). The secondary objectives were to identify information sources used to learn about the GFD and to compare adolescents' and parents' knowledge of the GFD. Methods: Adolescents (12-17 years) with CD and their parents from pediatric gastroenterology clinics in Calgary, Alberta, completed an online survey containing a knowledge assessment (Gluten-Free Diet Quiz [GFD-Q]), an adherence scale, questions about GFD information sources, and demographic/clinical information. GFD-Q scores were deemed "sufficient knowledge" with correct identification of 3/3 gluten-containing foods, ≥4/7 gluten-free foods, and ≥ 4/7 foods that may contain gluten; otherwise, scores were termed "insufficient knowledge". Results: Of the 40 adolescent-parent pairs, 15 of 40 adolescents (37%) had sufficient knowledge, and 25 of 40 adolescents (63%) had insufficient knowledge. Within the insufficient knowledge group, 14 of 25 (56%) did not correctly identify enough allowed gluten-free foods. Parents scored higher on the GFD-Q (67% had sufficient knowledge). Adolescents reported overall adherence to the GFD (88%), with adherence being similar between the sufficient and insufficient knowledge groups (80% versus 92%). The most helpful information sources included physicians, another person with CD, parent(s), and Google; apps were infrequently used. Conclusion: Adolescents report good adherence; however, they struggle with GFD knowledge, particularly in identifying gluten-free foods. Further research is required to explore GFD educational tools, including mobile apps and dietician-led teaching sessions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".