MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580009538 · doi:10.1002/hep.29085

Increased risk of mortality by fibrosis stage in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

2017· review· en· W2580009538 on OpenAlexafffund
Parambir S. Dulai, Siddharth Singh, Janki Patel, Meera Soni, Larry J. Prokop, Zobair M. Younossi, Giada Sebastiani, Mattias Ekstedt, Hannes Hagström, Patrik Nasr, Per Stål, Vincent Wai‐Sun Wong, Stergios Kechagias, Rolf Hultcrantz, Rohit Loomba

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesAmerican Gastroenterological AssociationFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesGilead SciencesBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsNonalcoholic fatty liver diseaseInternal medicineMedicineFibrosisStage (stratigraphy)GastroenterologyConfidence intervalMeta-analysisPopulationHazard ratioFatty liverDiseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liver fibrosis is the most important predictor of mortality in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Quantitative risk of mortality by fibrosis stage has not been systematically evaluated. We aimed to quantify the fibrosis stage-specific risk of all-cause and liver-related mortality in NAFLD. Through a systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified five adult NAFLD cohort studies reporting fibrosis stage-specific mortality (0-4). Using fibrosis stage 0 as a reference population, fibrosis stage-specific mortality rate ratios (MRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all-cause and liver-related mortality were estimated. The study is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Included were 1,495 NAFLD patients with 17,452 patient years of follow-up. Compared to NAFLD patients with no fibrosis (stage 0), NAFLD patients with fibrosis were at an increased risk for all-cause mortality, and this risk increased with increases in the stage of fibrosis: stage 1, MRR = 1.58 (95% CI 1.19-2.11); stage 2, MRR = 2.52 (95% CI 1.85-3.42); stage 3, MRR = 3.48 (95% CI 2.51-4.83); and stage 4, MRR = 6.40 (95% CI 4.11-9.95). The results were more pronounced as the risk of liver-related mortality increased exponentially with each increase in the stage of fibrosis: stage 1, MRR = 1.41 (95% CI 0.17-11.95); stage 2, MRR = 9.57 (95% CI 1.67-54.93); stage 3, MRR = 16.69 (95% CI 2.92-95.36); and stage 4, MRR = 42.30 (95% CI 3.51-510.34). Limitations of the study include an inability to adjust for comorbid conditions or demographics known to impact fibrosis progression in NAFLD and the inclusion of patients with simple steatosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis without fibrosis in the reference comparison group. CONCLUSION: The risk of liver-related mortality increases exponentially with increase in fibrosis stage; these data have important implications in assessing the utility of each stage and benefits of regression of fibrosis from one stage to another. (Hepatology 2017;65:1557-1565).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.032
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1,898
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207