2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101376
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and external validation of a clinical prediction model to aid coeliac disease diagnosis in primary care: An observational study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some of the microbial markers identified by LEfSE, differential abundance expression, and correlation in stool and duodenum samples were also present in the RF models ( Alloprevotella spp., Cutibacterium spp ., Delftia spp ., Neisseria spp., and Rothia spp. ), demonstrating their potential as microbial biomarkers able to discern between the disease and its possible usefulness in combination with other prediction models to estimate the risk of having CeD based on symptoms and risk factors previously described ( Elwenspoek et al, 2022 ). The RF model built with stool samples achieves an outstanding performance even with the validation dataset proving the capability of using a stool as a surrogate marker for changes in the duodenal microbiota of patients with CeD.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Some of the microbial markers identified by LEfSE, differential abundance expression, and correlation in stool and duodenum samples were also present in the RF models ( Alloprevotella spp., Cutibacterium spp ., Delftia spp ., Neisseria spp., and Rothia spp. ), demonstrating their potential as microbial biomarkers able to discern between the disease and its possible usefulness in combination with other prediction models to estimate the risk of having CeD based on symptoms and risk factors previously described ( Elwenspoek et al, 2022 ). The RF model built with stool samples achieves an outstanding performance even with the validation dataset proving the capability of using a stool as a surrogate marker for changes in the duodenal microbiota of patients with CeD.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Active case findings can help combat underdiagnosis by offering CeD tests to people at higher risk of CeD. In this sense, using prediction models to estimate the risk of having CeD based on symptoms and risk factors is helpful; however, the performance of these models is lower when using only clinical data ( Elwenspoek et al, 2022 ). The use of microbial markers isolated from stool samples, besides being a non-invasive procedure, will help to improve the predictive power of current models.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If medical codes are absent in a patient record we will assume that the patient does not have that diagnosis, or that the diagnosis was not considered sufficiently important to have been recorded by the GP in case of symptoms. 34 Concordantly, the analytical cohorts are not expected to have missing data for any of the predictor variables. It is possible that diagnoses may be recorded as free text, data to which we do not have access, rather than as diagnostic codes and this may lead to misclassification of some patients.…”
Section: Methods and Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…For diagnoses, if a medical code is present in the patient record (without a preceding time window limitation) then the variable is classified as being present for the patient. If medical codes are absent in a patient record we will assume that the patient does not have that diagnosis, or that the diagnosis was not considered sufficiently important to have been recorded by the GP in case of symptoms 34. Concordantly, the analytical cohorts are not expected to have missing data for any of the predictor variables.…”
Section: Methods and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For diagnoses, if medical codes are absent in a patient record, we will assume that the patient does not have that diagnosis, or that the diagnosis was not considered sufficiently important to have been recorded by the GP in case of symptoms. 31 Ethnicity information is routinely Open access collected in the UK NHS and so has increasingly high completeness, 32 and we will include an 'ethnicity unrecorded' category where it is unavailable because missingness is considered to be informative. 33 Accordingly, we do not expect any missing data for any of the predictor variables in the analytical cohort.…”
Section: Predictor Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%