Celiac Disease: An Assessment of Subjective Variation and Diagnostic Reproducibility of the Various Classification Systems

Celiac Disease: An Assessment of Subjective Variation and Diagnostic Reproducibility of the Various Classification Systems

Manas Madan

Contact

Sanjay Piplani

Contact

Manisha Sharma

Contact

Tejinder Singh Bhasin

Contact

Mridu Manjari

Contact

Harjot Kaur

Contact

Jasmeet kaur

Contact

Saumil Garg

Contact

to Baba Farid University of Health Sciences

Celiac Disease: An Assessment of Subjective Variation and Diagnostic Reproducibility of the Various Classification Systems

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

00R97

Celiac Disease: An Assessment of Subjective Variation and Diagnostic Reproducibility of the Various Classification Systems Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground

Abstract

Introduction: Celiac disease (CD) is a chronic immune mediated disorder occurring in genetically predisposed individuals with intolerance to gluten, particularly its protein gliadin. The histological examination still remains the gold standard for its diagnosis. Marsh-Oberhuber classification is very widely used by pathologists for the diagnosis of CD and is valid under optimal clinical conditions. However, due to the presence of greater diagnostic categories, it lends itself to greater subjective variability and lower interobserver and intraobserver agreement and hence lower reproducibility of the diagnosis. Recently, Corazza and Villanacci introduced a classification that reduces the number of categories and the interobserver variation. This study was undertaken to observe the reproducibility of the Marsh-Oberhuber classification in comparison to the newer Corazza and Villanacci classification and determine the intra and interobserver variation in both the classifications.

References

9 Cites in Article

Reference Format

Vincenzo Villanacci,Paola Ceppa,Enrico Tavani,Carla Vindigni,Umberto Volta (2011). Coeliac disease: The histology report.
F Bao,Phr Green,G Bhagat (2012). An update on celiac disease histopathology and the road ahead.
G Corazza,V Villanacci (2005). Coeliac disease.
I Brown,J Smith,C Rosty (2012). Gastrointestinal pathology in Celiac Disease: A Case series of 150 Consecutive newly diagnosed patients.
Arzu Ensari (2010). Gluten-Sensitive Enteropathy (Celiac Disease): Controversies in Diagnosis and Classification.
S Serra,P Jani (2006). An approach to duodenal biopsies.
T Bhasin,R Mannan,V Malhotra,N Sood,A Sood,P Bhatia (2010). Hiatological recovery profiles of patients with celiac disease-An Indian perspective.
Gino Corazza,Vincenzo Villanacci,Claudia Zambelli,Massimo Milione,Ombretta Luinetti,Carla Vindigni,Caterina Chioda,Luca Albarello,Daniela Bartolini,Francesco Donato (2007). Comparison of the Interobserver Reproducibility With Different Histologic Criteria Used in Celiac Disease.
Gino Corazza,Fiorenza Bonvicini,Marzio Frazzoni,Marisa Gatto,Giovanni Gasbarrini (1982). Observer Variation in Assessment of Jejunal Biopsy Specimens.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Manas Madan. 2015. \u201cCeliac Disease: An Assessment of Subjective Variation and Diagnostic Reproducibility of the Various Classification Systems\u201d. Global Journal of Medical Research - C: Microbiology & Pathology GJMR-C Volume 15 (GJMR Volume 15 Issue C1).

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

GJMR Volume 15 Issue C1

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/gjmra

Print ISSN 0975-5888

e-ISSN 2249-4618

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

GJMR-C Classification NLMC Code: WD 175

Submission ReceivedDecember 14, 2014
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted January 4, 2015
Published January 15, 2015

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

February 28, 2015

Language

Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 108

Country: India

Subject: Global Journal of Medical Research - C: Microbiology & Pathology

Authors: Manas Madan, Sanjay Piplani, Manisha Sharma, Tejinder Singh Bhasin, Mridu Manjari, Harjot Kaur, Jasmeet kaur, Saumil Garg (PhD/Dr. count: 0)

View Count (all-time): 220

Total Views (Real + Logic): 4369

Total Downloads (simulated): 2151

Publish Date: 2015 02, Sat

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 56 views
Month 2: 46 views
Month 3: 41 views
Month 4: 23 views
Month 5: 27 views
Month 6: 55 views
Month 7: 42 views
Month 8: 32 views
Month 9: 31 views
Month 10: 23 views
Month 11: 33 views
Month 12: 22 views
Month 13: 29 views
Month 14: 36 views
Month 15: 31 views
Month 16: 30 views
Month 17: 49 views
Month 18: 35 views
Month 19: 36 views
Month 20: 29 views
Month 21: 38 views
Month 22: 33 views
Month 23: 24 views
Month 24: 19 views
Month 25: 32 views
Month 26: 36 views
Month 27: 49 views
Month 28: 33 views
Month 29: 26 views
Month 30: 31 views
Month 31: 42 views
Month 32: 33 views
Month 33: 48 views
Month 34: 26 views
Month 35: 36 views
Month 36: 24 views
Month 37: 23 views
Month 38: 25 views
Month 39: 15 views
Month 40: 13 views
Month 41: 37 views
Month 42: 36 views
Month 43: 21 views
Month 44: 27 views
Month 45: 35 views
Month 46: 38 views
Month 47: 23 views
Month 48: 23 views
Month 49: 39 views
Month 50: 18 views
Month 51: 19 views
Month 52: 29 views
Month 53: 41 views
Month 54: 40 views
Month 55: 39 views
Month 56: 25 views
Month 57: 47 views
Month 58: 40 views
Month 59: 26 views
Month 60: 32 views
Month 61: 23 views
Month 62: 26 views
Month 63: 46 views
Month 64: 32 views
Month 65: 16 views
Month 66: 23 views
Month 67: 27 views
Month 68: 37 views
Month 69: 34 views
Month 70: 22 views
Month 71: 34 views
Month 72: 18 views
Month 73: 26 views
Month 74: 28 views
Month 75: 46 views
Month 76: 37 views
Month 77: 33 views
Month 78: 47 views
Month 79: 42 views
Month 80: 24 views
Month 81: 21 views
Month 82: 48 views
Month 83: 17 views
Month 84: 28 views
Month 85: 29 views
Month 86: 32 views
Month 87: 18 views
Month 88: 40 views
Month 89: 21 views
Month 90: 24 views
Month 91: 40 views
Month 92: 28 views
Month 93: 33 views
Month 94: 23 views
Month 95: 43 views
Month 96: 24 views
Month 97: 32 views
Month 98: 25 views
Month 99: 16 views
Month 100: 40 views
Month 101: 16 views
Month 102: 43 views
Month 103: 40 views
Month 104: 40 views
Month 105: 15 views
Month 106: 32 views
Month 107: 20 views
Month 108: 15 views
Month 109: 21 views
Month 110: 21 views
Month 111: 23 views
Month 112: 39 views
Month 113: 43 views
Month 114: 22 views
Month 115: 25 views
Month 116: 30 views
Month 117: 19 views
Month 118: 23 views
Month 119: 19 views
Month 120: 30 views
Month 121: 19 views
Month 122: 25 views
Month 123: 34 views
Month 124: 27 views
Month 125: 39 views
Month 126: 33 views
Month 127: 58 views
Month 128: 41 views
Month 129: 28 views
Month 130: 42 views
Month 131: 16 views
Month 132: 40 views
Month 133: 49 views
Month 134: 35 views
Month 135: 29 views

Total Views: 4369

Total Downloads: 2151

2026 Trends

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]