Influence of chronic hepatitis C infection on the monocyte-to-platelet ratio: data analysis from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2009–2016)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) causes life-threatening chronic infections. Implementation of novel, economical or widely available screening tools can help detect unidentified cases and facilitate their linkage to care. We investigated the relationship between chronic HCV infection and a potential complete blood count biomarker (the monocyte-to-platelet ratio) in the United States. METHODS: The analytic dataset was selected from cycle years 2009-2016 of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Complete case data- with no missingness- was available for n = 5281 observations, one-hundred and twenty-two (n = 122) of which were exposed to chronic HCV. The primary analysis used survey-weighted logistic regression to model the effect of chronic HCV on the monocyte-to-platelet ratio adjusting for demographic and biological confounders in a causal inference framework. Missing data and propensity score methods were respectively performed as a secondary and sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In the analytic dataset, outcome data was available for n = 5281 (n = 64,245,530 in the weighted sample) observations of which n = 122 (n = 1,067,882 in the weighted sample) tested nucleic acid positive for HCV. Those exposed to chronic HCV infection in the United States have 3.10 times the odds of a high monocyte-to-platelet ratio than those not exposed (OR = 3.10, [95% CI: 1.55-6.18]). CONCLUSION: A relationship exists between chronic HCV infection and the monocyte-to-platelet ratio in the general population of the United States. Reversing the direction of this association to predict chronic HCV infection from complete blood counts, could provide an economically feasible and universal screening tool, which would help link patients with care.
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 | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".