Acute-on-chronic liver failure: Objective admission and support criteria in the intensive care unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cirrhosis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Significant complications include variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, and infection. When these complications are severe, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) is often required for organ support and management. Intensive care therapy can also serve as a bridge to liver transplantation. Along with decompensation of cirrhosis, the concept of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) has emerged. This involves an acute precipitating event, such as the development of infection in a patient with cirrhosis, which leads to acute deterioration of hepatic function and extrahepatic organ failure. Extrahepatic complications often include renal, cardiovascular, and respiratory failures. Patients with significant extrahepatic and hepatic failures need ICU admission for organ support. Again, in patients who are deemed suitable liver transplant candidates, intensive care management may allow bridging to liver transplantation. However, patients with a Chronic Liver Failure Consortium ACLF score greater than 70 at 48 to 72 hours post-ICU admission do not seem to benefit from ongoing intensive support and a palliative approach may be more appropriate.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".