1. A Simple Validated Gluten-Free Diet Adherence Survey for Adults With Celiac Disease 
Daniel A. Leffler, Melinda Dennis, Jessica B. Edwards George, Shailaja Jamma, Suma Magge, Earl F. Cook, Detlef Schuppan, Ciaran P. Kelly 
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 
Volume 7, Issue 5, Pages e2 (May 2009)
DOI: /j.cgh
Copyright © 2009 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
Distribution of SDE scores. SDE scores were as follows: 1 = excellent GFD adherence; 2 = good GFD adherence; 3 = fair GFD adherence; 4 = poor GFD adherence; 5 = very poor GFD adherence; and 6 = not on a GFD (n = 200).
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2009 7, e2DOI: ( /j.cgh )
Copyright © 2009 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Correlation of CDAT score with the SDE. Lower scores represent better diet adherence. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2009 7, e2DOI: ( /j.cgh )
Copyright © 2009 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
(A) ROCs for the prediction of inadequate GFD adherence as measured by the SDE by the CDAT versus participant self-report in the model building cohort (n = 120; AUC = and 0.739, respectively). (B) ROCs for the prediction of inadequate GFD adherence as measured by the SDE by the CDAT versus participant self-report in the validation cohort (n = 80; AUC = and 0.650, respectively). (C) ROCs for the prediction of inadequate GFD adherence as measured by the SDE by the CDAT versus the anti-tTG cohort (n = 150; AUC = 0.830, and 0.652, respectively).
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2009 7, e2DOI: ( /j.cgh )
Copyright © 2009 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions