MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066384493 · doi:10.2147/tcrm.s4467

Fatty liver in children

2009· article· en· W2066384493 on OpenAlexaff
Mandana Rafeey, Mogaddasi, Hasani, Ghaffari

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutics and Clinical Risk Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Intestinal Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFatty liverNonalcoholic fatty liver diseaseInternal medicineSteatohepatitisGastroenterologyBody mass indexAlanine aminotransferaseMetabolic syndromePathophysiologyObesityDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical and laboratory characteristics of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in a referral center of pediatrics in the northwest of Iran. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study all subjects aged between six months to 15 years that were referred to the sonography unit, were investigated for fatty liver from March 2005 to August 2006. Patients with fatty liver change underwent detailed clinical and laboratory evaluation. RESULTS: From 1500 children who were investigated, 34 subjects with sonographic evidence of fatty liver were enrolled in this study (2.3%). The mean age was 6.53 +/- 3.07 years. Elevated aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase was detected in 38.2% and 47.1% of patients, respectively. The mean level of cholesterol was 461 +/- 182.23 mg/dl and 94.1% of patients had hypercholesterolemia. Total cholesterol level and serum aminotransferase levels had a significant positive correlation with severity of fatty liver (p < 0.05). Mean body mass index was significantly higher in patients with severe fatty liver (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The epidemiology of pediatric NAFLD should inform future attempts to develop evaluated screening protocols. Moreover, these data should guide efforts to delineate the pathophysiology of fatty liver in children.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTherapeutics and Clinical Risk ManagementSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207