Liver Transplantation for Alcoholic Liver Disease among Canadian Transplant Centres: A National Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND⁄ OBJECTIVE: Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is a controversial yet established indication for liver transplantation (LT), and there is emerging evidence supporting a survival benefit in selected patients with severe acute alcoholic hepatitis. The aim of the present survey was to describe policies among Canadian transplant centres for patients with ALD. METHODS: A survey was distributed to the medical directors of all seven liver transplant centres in Canada. RESULTS: All seven liver transplant programs in Canada participated in the survey. Every centre requires patients to have a minimum of six months of abstinence from alcohol before listing for LT. Completion of a rehabilitation program is only mandatory in one program; the remaining programs do not mandate this if patients have demonstrated prolonged abstinence, and sufficient insight and social supports. No program considers LT for patients with severe acute alcoholic hepatitis, although six of the seven programs are interested in exploring a national policy. Random alcohol checks for waitlisted patients are performed routinely on patients listed for ALD at only one centre; the remaining centres only perform checks if there is clinical suspicion. In the past five years, the mean (± SD) number of patients per centre with graft dysfunction from recidivism was 10±4.36; a mean of 2.5±4.36 patients per centre developed graft failure. CONCLUSIONS: With minor exceptions, LT policies for subjects with ALD are uniform across Canadian transplant programs. Presently, no centres perform LT for acute alcoholic hepatitis, although there is broad interest in exploring a national policy. Recidivism resulting in graft loss is a rare phenomenon.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".