MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970588274 · doi:10.1055/s-0039-1696639

Management of Lifestyle Factors in Individuals with Cirrhosis: A Pragmatic Review

2019· review· en· W2970588274 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Liver Disease · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCirrhosisLifestyle modificationSedentary lifestyleEtiologyMalnutritionDiseaseObesityPopulationHepatocellular carcinomaPhysical activityIntensive care medicineGerontologyPhysical therapyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lifestyle-related factors are major determinants/modifiers of prognosis in patients with cirrhosis. Accumulating evidence indicates that malnutrition, obesity, sedentary lifestyle, alcohol and smoking habits, and likely poor oral hygiene can increase the risk of progression of the disease, and some of them are linked to higher risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. Importantly, lifestyle-related factors can be largely corrected, and as such they represent an attractive approach to be added to etiological and pharmacological therapy in patients with cirrhosis. Nonetheless, lifestyle is often neglected in this population. In this concise review, the authors present evidence supporting lifestyle changes in patients with cirrhosis-including, but not limited to, nutrition and physical activity in malnourished and obese patients. They also discuss some elements of motivational interviews as a tool to support a better interaction between hepatologists and patients in this field.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.289 · 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