Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Canadian First Nations and Non-First Nations Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Features of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) have yet to be described in the Canadian First Nations (FN) population. The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence, severity, and outcome of NAFLD in FN versus non-FN patients at an urban, tertiary care centre. Methods. Adults with NAFLD and no additional liver disease were identified in a prospectively derived database at the University of Manitoba. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, imaging, and histologic data were analyzed. Results. 482 subjects fulfilled diagnostic criteria for NAFLD, including 33 (7%) FN. Aside from rural residence, diabetes and cholestasis being more common in FN patients, the ages, gender distributions, clinical and radiologic features, and liver enzyme/function test results were similar in the two cohorts. Noninvasive tests of fibrosis (APRI and NAFLD fibrosis scores) were also similar in the two cohorts. There were no significant differences in liver enzyme or function tests in either cohort after approximately three years of follow-up. Conclusion. Compared to the prevalence of FN persons in the general population of this study site (10-15%), FN patients were underrepresented in this NAFLD population. The severity and progression of liver disease in FN patients appear to be similar to those in non-FN patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".