Some clarification is necessary on the Oslo definitions for coeliac disease-related terms
- First Department of Medicine, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico S. Matteo, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
- Correspondence to Professor Gino R Corazza, Clinica Medica I, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico S. Matteo, Università di Pavia, Piazzale Golgi 5, 27100 Pavia, Italy; gr.corazza{at}smatteo.pv.it
-
Contributors ADS and GRC contributed equally to this manuscript.
- Accepted 11 April 2012
- Published Online First 26 June 2012
We read with much interest and welcome the Oslo definitions for coeliac disease (CD) drawn up by a multidisciplinary task force of 16 international experts,1 one of whom (FB) belongs to our group and shares our opinions on CD. However, the strength of each statement could have been graded according to an evidence-based consensus on the definition.2 The failure to do so is a pity, as the more convincing a statement is, the more it will be accepted and followed.
To give an example, while the reasons that led to rejecting terms such as ‘typical’ or ‘atypical’ seem very clear, those that led to preferring ‘asymptomatic’ (39 PubMed hits) to ‘silent’ (80 hits) are less …
