ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
Developing a Measure to Assess General Knowledge for Coeliac Disease.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe importance of establishing knowledge about coeliac disease relates to the increasing incidence of symptomatic individuals who are undiagnosed.
objectivesThis study aimed to develop and pilot a tool that could be used to measure general knowledge regarding coeliac disease.
designA questionnaire was developed using 41 questions identified from an existing 300 published questions, to assess knowledge of symptoms, diagnosis, and management of coeliac disease (such as appropriate food preparation).
methodsConsenting participants completed the pilot questionnaire online (N = 359). Attrition analyses were conducted to determine whether there were any significant differences between those who completed the questionnaire (n = 284) and participants who left the study. Assessment of the questionnaire occurred in two stages. Initially, internal consistency, correlation, and exploratory factor analyses were conducted on the original 41 questions. Analyses were then repeated for the revised 25 questions, after low-performing questions were removed.
resultsAnalyses of 284 participant responses indicated that low-performing questions could be removed to consolidate the questions into a single, streamlined scale with 25 questions. Three sub-scales were identified in the final questionnaire: basic knowledge, symptoms, and applied knowledge.
conclusionsThe 41-question measure effectively distinguishes low- and high-levels of knowledge of coeliac disease; however, a streamlined scale of 25 questions can reduce completion time and attrition while maintaining validity. This questionnaire can be used for robust comparisons of knowledge between different populations. This questionnaire also offers a useful tool for identifying specific knowledge gaps, to guide efforts to raise awareness of coeliac disease in the general public, as well as for specific professions, to improve time to diagnosis, as well as food safety. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: One of the authors is the mother of teenage children with coeliac disease. Another author was diagnosed with coeliac disease at the age of 27 years. Another author developed coeliac disease at age 16, after which it took her 19 years to achieve diagnosis. The other author does not have coeliac disease or an immediate family member with coeliac disease. The research team therefore has a productive combination of insiders and outsiders.
Indexed as
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.