ArticleNEJM AI2025
Machine Learning Achieves Pathologist-Level Coeliac Disease Diagnosis.
Article in NEJM AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Novel Immunohistochemical Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Celiac Disease Demonstrates the Utility of TCRδ Immunostaining.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Current Advances, Clinical Integration, and Future Directions: A Narrative Review.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Risk of malignancy and surveillance of premalignant gastrointestinal lesions in adult celiac disease.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- A retrospective analysis of interobserver variability in 356 cases over a period 10 years: Celiac disease.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- State of clinical AI in 2026.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Rethinking Celiac Disease Management: Treatment Approaches Beyond the Gluten-Free Diet.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- The comparative pathology workbench: An update.Journal of pathology informatics · 2025Article
- Duodenal Biopsy Audit: Relative Frequency of Diagnoses, Key Words on Request Forms Indicating Severe Pathology, and Potential Diagnoses for Intraepithelial Lymphocytosis, as a Foundation for Developing Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic Approaches.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- REASONING BEYOND ACCURACY: EXPERT EVALUATION OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS IN DIAGNOSTIC PATHOLOGY.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Interpretable machine learning-based detection of coeliac disease.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- Toward Precision Medicine in Celiac Disease: Emerging Roles of Multiomics and Artificial Intelligence.Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The diagnosis of coeliac disease (CD), an autoimmune disorder with an estimated global prevalence of around 1%, generally relies on the histological examination of duodenal biopsies. However, inter-pathologist agreement for coeliac disease diagnosis is estimated to be no more than 80%. We aim to improve coeliac disease diagnosis by developing a novel, accurate, machine-learning-based diagnostic classifier. Methods: We present a machine learning model that diagnoses the presence or absence of coeliac disease from a set of duodenal biopsies representative of real-world clinical data. Our model was trained on a diverse dataset of 3,383 -slide images (WSIs) of H&E-stained duodenal biopsies from four hospitals featuring five different WSI scanners along with their clinical diagnoses. We trained our model using the multiple-instance-learning paradigm in a weakly-supervised manner with cross-validation and evaluated it on an independent test set featuring 644 unseen scans from a different regional NHS Trust. Additionally, we compared the model's predictions to independent diagnoses from four specialist pathologists on a subset of the test data. Results: Our model diagnosed coeliac disease in an independent test set from a previously unseen source with accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity exceeding 95% and an area under the ROC curve exceeding 99%. These results indicate that the model has the potential to outperform pathologists. In comparing the model's predictions to diagnoses on unseen test data from four independent pathologists, we found statistically indistinguishable results between pathologist-pathologist and pathologist-model inter-observer agreement ( Conclusions: Our model achieved pathologist-level performance in diagnosing the presence or absence of coeliac disease from a representative set of duodenal biopsies, representing a significant advancement towards the adoption of machine learning in clinical practice. Additionally, it demonstrated strong generalisability, performing equally well on biopsies from a previously unseen hospital. We concluded that our model has the potential to revolutionise duodenal biopsy diagnosis by accurately identifying or ruling out coeliac disease, thereby significantly reducing the time required for pathologists to make a diagnosis.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.