Cited by 70Celiac Disease Research and ManagementEosinophilic EsophagitisGastrointestinal disorders and treatments

Evidence-Informed Expert Recommendations for the Management of Celiac Disease in Children

Snyder, John, Butzner, J. Decker, DeFelice, Amy R., Fasano, Alessio, Guandalini, Stefano, Liu, Edwin, Newton, Kimberly P.·2016·Pediatrics

Abstract

Although the need for effective long-term follow-up for patients with celiac disease (CD) has been recognized by many expert groups, published practice guidelines have not provided a clear approach for the optimal management of these patients. In an attempt to provide a thoughtful and practical approach for managing these patients, a group of experts in pediatric CD performed a critical review of the available literature in 6 categories associated with CD to develop a set of best practices by using evidence-based data and expert opinion. The 6 categories included the following: bone health, hematologic issues, endocrine problems, liver disease, nutritional issues, and testing. Evidence was assessed by using standardized criteria for evaluating the quality of the data, grade of evidence, and strength of conclusions. Over 600 publications were reviewed, and 172 were chosen for inclusion. The thorough review of the results demonstrated that the quality of the data available was often insufficient to provide unequivocal best practices. However, using the available data and the clinical experience of the panel, a practical framework for the management of children with CD was created. These recommendations were developed by our expert panel and do not necessarily reflect the policy of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The potential usefulness of these best practices is underscored by the fact that consensus, measured by the outcome of anonymous voting, was reached by the panel for 24 of the 25 questions. We hope that these best practices may be useful to the pediatric gastroenterology and larger general pediatric communities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2015-3147

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Snyder, J., Butzner, J. D., DeFelice, A. R., Fasano, A., Guandalini, S., Liu, E., & Newton, K. P.
Affiliations
  • Children's National (US)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
  • NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • University of Chicago Medical Center (US)
  • Children's Hospital Colorado (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Snyder, John
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2016-09-01
Volume
138
Issue
3
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2518209102
Cited by
70
References
8
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2
FWCI
8.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Celiac Disease Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Eosinophilic Esophagitis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Gastrointestinal disorders and treatments
Keywords
celiac disease, pediatric celiac disease, long-term follow-up, best practices, bone health, hematologic complications, endocrine complications, liver disease, expert consensus recommendations
MeSH terms
Celiac Disease, Child, Humans, Evidence-Based Medicine

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