Cystic fibrosis liver disease in Newfoundland and Labrador: a prevalence study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Liver disease in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) is an understudied and increasingly common concern. The prevalence of cystic fibrosis liver disease (CFLD) in Canada has not been clearly established, although it is now the third leading cause of death among patients with CF. The current literature identifies a range in prevalence from 4% to 65%, which implies the need for further research. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of CFLD among adult patients with CF in Newfoundland and Labrador. Methods: Charts of patients with CF from the St. John's, Newfoundland, CF clinics were reviewed retrospectively for the presence of elevated liver enzymes, imaging or biopsy of the liver, and other etiologies of liver disease. Prevalence was determined for patients meeting the criteria for CFLD in the population as a whole and for those who had undergone all pertinent investigations. Results: The diagnostic guidelines for CFLD were met in 14 of 57 cases (24.6% prevalence). Severe CFLD was present in 9 patients (15.8%). Among all patients with CF, 33 (57.9%) had isolated liver enzyme elevation. Eleven patients had not had the requisite imaging performed for accurate diagnosis. Among the subset who had undergone imaging, the prevalence of CFLD was 30%. Conclusions: This study attempted to fill the gap in Canadian CFLD prevalence data by examining the population with CF in Newfoundland and Labrador. The prevalence of CFLD was found to be between 25% and 30%. More accurate determination of prevalence could be done with future cross-sectional or prospective studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".