Liver disease referrals to an urban, hospital‐based hepatology outpatient clinic over the past 25 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Additional hepatologists are required to manage the rapidly increasing number of patients with liver disease. One disincentive to trainees considering a career in hepatology is the longstanding perception that outpatient hepatology consists largely of managing patients with alcohol‐induced liver disease (ALD). Objectives To document the types of liver diseases and changes in liver disease referrals to an urban outpatient liver disease clinic over the past 25 years. Methods The nature of the liver disorder, age, gender, and socioeconomic status of patients referred to an urban, hospital‐based, liver diseases outpatient program were documented from 1992 to 2017. Joinpoint analysis was performed to identify significant trends in referral prevalence rates of various disorders. Results In 1992/1993, hepatitis C virus (HCV), followed by hepatitis B virus (HBV), “other”, non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) were the most common underlying liver diseases in referred patients (39, 36, 12, 4.5, and 3.5% respectively), whereas in 2016/2017, NAFLD, HBV, HCV, “other,” and ALD were most common (60, 15, 12, 8.7, and 3.3%, respectively). Aside from NAFLD referrals, which consistently increased over the 25‐year period, the prevalence of all other liver disease referrals fluctuated but generally declined. Recently referred patients were significantly older (38 ± 13 years in 1992/1993 and 49 ± 15 years in 2016/2017, P < 0.0001), while gender and socioeconomic status have not changed. Conclusions Hepatology is a diverse, dynamic subspecialty where ALD continues to constitute less than 5% of all patient referrals.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".