Intestinal microbiota in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Despite evidence that the intestinal microbiota (IM) is involved in the pathogenesis of obesity, the IM composition of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has not been well characterized. This prospective, cross-sectional study was aimed at identifying differences in IM between adults with biopsy-proven NAFLD (simple steatosis [SS] or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis [NASH]) and living liver donors as healthy controls (HC). Fifty subjects were included: 11 SS, 22 NASH, and 17 HC. One stool sample was collected from each participant. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to measure total bacterial counts, Bacteroides/Prevotella (herein referred to as Bacteroidetes), Clostridium leptum, C. coccoides, bifidobacteria, Escherichia coli and Archaea in stool. Clinical and laboratory data, food records, and activity logs were collected. Patients with NASH had a lower percentage of Bacteroidetes (Bacteroidetes to total bacteria counts) compared to both SS and HC (P = 0.006) and higher fecal C. coccoides compared to those with SS (P = 0.04). There were no differences in the remaining microorganisms. As body mass index (BMI) and dietary fat intake differed between the groups (P < 0.05), we performed linear regression adjusting for these variables. The difference in C. coccoides was no longer significant after adjusting for BMI and fat intake. However, there continued to be a significant association between the presence of NASH and lower percentage Bacteroidetes even after adjusting for these variables (P = 0.002; 95% confidence interval = -0.06 to -0.02). CONCLUSION: There is an inverse and diet-/BMI-independent association between the presence of NASH and percentage Bacteroidetes in the stool, suggesting that the IM may play a role in the development of NAFLD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".