MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406435689 · doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000003318

Molecular Triggers of Non-celiac Wheat Sensitivity: A Scoping Review and Analysis

2025· review· en· W4406435689 on OpenAlexaff
Christine S. An, Jimin Yang, María Inés Pinto-Sánchez, Elena F. Verdú, Benjamin Lebwohl, Peter H. Green, Armin Alaedini

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsMedicineSensitivity (control systems)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Nonceliac wheat sensitivity (NCWS) is characterized by a symptomatic response to the ingestion of foods containing wheat and related cereal grains in the absence of celiac disease or wheat allergy. Despite efforts to identify the constituent component(s) of wheat responsible for triggering NCWS, no consensus has emerged, leading to competing claims. We aimed to systematically evaluate the literature and provide an evidence-based conclusion on the contribution of specific wheat components to NCWS. METHODS: A comprehensive search of multiple bibliographic databases was conducted, focusing on primary research. Data were systematically analyzed, and methodological gaps were identified. RESULTS: The search identified 175 unique citations, revealing 3 categories of compounds frequently considered as potential triggers of NCWS: gluten, fermentable carbohydrates, and amylase/trypsin inhibitors (ATIs). Among 16 double-blind placebo-controlled studies, 8 reported a greater symptomatic response to gluten than the control. Only 1 controlled study examined fermentable carbohydrates, finding a modest effect, but the tested carbohydrates were not derived from wheat. No eligible studies assessed ATIs or other wheat-related compounds as potential NCWS triggers. Across studies, significant limitations and methodological inconsistencies were noted, particularly in participant selection, challenge protocols, and data reporting. DISCUSSION: Gluten is the most extensively investigated wheat component linked to NCWS, but evidence for its role is inconsistent and undermined by methodological limitations. No direct evidence currently links wheat fermentable carbohydrates, ATIs, or other components to NCWS symptoms. The existing evidence is insufficient to justify restricting specific components of wheat in the management of NCWS. Future studies must overcome the identified gaps to rigorously investigate the role of wheat and related cereals in NCWS, with the potential to advance diagnosis and treatment.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0250.022
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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