Prognostic factors in paediatric acute liver failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To study the aetiology, outcome and prognostic indicators in children with acute liver failure (ALF). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of 210 patients (107 males/103 females; median age: 5.33 years, range: 1-17.4). Patients were followed until discharge (group 1), death (group 2) or liver transplantation (LT; group 3). Data from group 1 were compared to data from the other two groups and King's College criteria were also assessed. RESULTS: Final diagnoses were: 128 (61%) hepatitis A, 68 (32%) indeterminate and 14 (7%) others. The characteristics of patients who survived (n = 59), died (n = 61) and underwent LT (n = 90) were analysed. In multivariate analysis, prothrombin time and encephalopathy III/IV were the most significant parameters suggesting a high likelihood of death. When King's College criteria were applied on admission in patients with and without transplantation, the positive predictive values were 96% and 95%, and the negative predictive values were 82% and 82%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatitis A is the main cause of ALF in children in Argentina. Advanced encephalopathy and prolonged prothrombin time were significantly associated with death or need for LT. King's College criteria for predicting the outcome of ALF are applicable in children, including those with ALF due to hepatitis A infection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".