Adequate follow-up in celiac disease is important to improve dietary compliance and treat disease-related symptoms and possible complications. However, data on the follow-up of celiac children is... Show moreAdequate follow-up in celiac disease is important to improve dietary compliance and treat disease-related symptoms and possible complications. However, data on the follow-up of celiac children is scarce. We aimed to assess current pediatric celiac follow-up practices across Europe. Pediatricians and pediatric gastroenterologists from 35 countries in Europe, Israel, Turkey, and Russia completed an anonymous survey which comprised a 52-item questionnaire developed by the ESPGHAN Special Interest Group on Celiac Disease. A total of 911 physicians, the majority of whom exclusively worked in pediatric care (83%) and academic institutions (60%), completed the questionnaire. Mean age and mean experience with celiac care were 48.7 years (+/- 10.6) and 15.7 years (+/- 9.9), respectively. The vast majority (>= 92%) always assessed anthropometry, dietary adherence, and tissue-transglutaminase IgA-antibodies at every visit, with the first visit being between 3 and 6 months after diagnosis. Other parameters (% always tested) were as follows: complete blood count (60%), iron status (48%), liver enzymes (42%), thyroid function (38%), and vitamin D (26%). Quality of life was never assessed by 35% of the responding physicians. Transition to adult care was mostly completed via a written transition report (37%) or no formal transition at all (27%).Conclusions: Follow-up of celiac children and adolescents in Europe may be improved, especially regarding a more rational use of (laboratory) tests, dietary and QoL assessment, and transition to adult care. Evidence-based advice from international scientific societies is needed. Show less
In the latest twenty years we have witnessed an exponential proliferation of international commissions of inquiry mandated to investigate serious violations of international law. However, the... Show moreIn the latest twenty years we have witnessed an exponential proliferation of international commissions of inquiry mandated to investigate serious violations of international law. However, the inquiry tool has been originally institutionalised at the beginning of the 20th century as mean of preventive diplomacy aimed at stating the facts for dispute settlement purposes. Since then inquiries have significantly evolved into mechanisms that denounce and shed light on serious violations of international law in order to provoke a response by the international community. What are the underlying causes of this new role and of the recent surge of inquiry commissions? Should commissions of inquiry be viewed as merely fact-finders or as law-applicable/adjudication bodies? Should their tasks be confined to finding the facts or may they perform more dynamic and political roles such as raising alert and provoking reactions? What (arguably) should be the role of commissions of inquiry in the criminal accountability process? These and other questions are the core of this academic contribution which, through a comprehensive analysis of the work and practice of commissions of inquiry, aims to shed more light on a topic that has increasingly become the focus of intense debate among academics, practitioners and international decision-makers. Show less
