The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mass screening for coeliac disease using antihuman transglutaminase antibody assay
Open accessAbstract
AIMS: To determine coeliac disease prevalence by an anti-transglutaminase antibody assay in a large paediatric population; to evaluate acceptance of the screening programme, dietary compliance, and long term health effects. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of 3188 schoolchildren (aged 6-12) and prospective follow up of diagnosed cases. Main outcome measures were: prevalence of coeliac disease defined by intestinal biopsy or positivity to both human tissue transglutaminase and anti-endomysium antibodies in HLA DQ2-8 positive subjects; percentage of children whose families accepted screening; dietary compliance as defined by negativity for anti-transglutaminase antibodies; and presence of clinical or laboratory abnormalities at 24 month follow up. RESULTS: The families of 3188/3665 children gave their consent (87%). Thirty biopsy proven coeliacs were identified (prevalence 1:106). Three other children testing positive for both coeliac related autoantibodies and HLA DQ2-8 but refusing biopsy were considered as having coeliac disease (prevalence 1:96). Of 33 cases, 12 had coeliac related symptoms. The 30 biopsy proven coeliacs followed a gluten-free diet. Of 28 subjects completing 18-24 months follow up, 20 (71.4%) were negative for anti-transglutaminase antibodies, while eight were slightly positive; symptoms resolved in all 12 symptomatic children. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of coeliac disease is high in Italian schoolchildren. Two thirds of cases were asymptomatic. Acceptance of the programme was good, as was dietary compliance. Given the high prevalence and possible complications of untreated coeliac disease, the availability of a valid screening method, and evidence of willingness to comply with dietary treatment population mass screening deserves careful consideration.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Global Prevalence of Celiac Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Singh, P., Arora, A., Strand, T. A., Leffler, D. A., Catassi, C., Green, P. H., Kelly, C. P., Ahuja, V., & Makharia, G. K. (2018) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.037 · Cited by 1,743
Di Sabatino, A., & Corazza, G. R. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60254-3 · Cited by 555
The diagnostic accuracy of serologic tests for celiac disease: A systematic review
Rostom, A., Dubé, C., Cranney, A., Saloojee, N., Sy, R., Garritty, C., Sampson, M., Zhang, L., Yazdi, F., Mamaladze, V., et al. (2005) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.02.028 · Cited by 512
Rewers, M. (2005) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.02.030 · Cited by 340
Celiac Disease Revealed in 3% of Swedish 12‐year‐olds Born During an Epidemic
Myléus, A., Ivarsson, A., Webb, C., Danielsson, L., Hernell, O., Högberg, L., Karlsson, E., Lagerqvist, C., Norström, F., Rosén, A., et al. (2009) · Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · doi:10.1097/mpg.0b013e31818c52cc · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Tommasini, A.
- Venue
- Archives of Disease in Childhood
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-06-01
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 512-515
- ISSN
- 0003-9888 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2044
- OpenAlex
- W2147475572
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mass screening for coeliac disease using antihuman transglutaminase antibody assay. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/adc.2003.029603
- The paper
- Tommasini, A. (2004). Mass screening for coeliac disease using antihuman transglutaminase antibody assay. Archives of Disease in Childhood. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2003.029603
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.