MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214836651 · doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2021.100411

Real-world management of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis differs from clinical practice guideline recommendations and across regions

2021· article· en· W3214836651 on OpenAlex
Quentin M. Anstee, Kate Hallsworth, Niall Lynch, Adrien Hauvespre, Eid Mansour, Sam Kozma, John-Paul Marino, Juliana Bottomley, James Piercy, Victoria Higgins

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJHEP Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsGilead Sciences (Canada)
FundersNIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research CentreHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeInnovative Medicines InitiativeEuropean CommissionEuropean Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and AssociationsNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchGilead Sciences
KeywordsSteatohepatitisGuidelineMedicineTransient elastographyFatty liverDiseaseClinical PracticeFamily medicineInternal medicinePathologyFibrosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite availability of diagnostic and management reference guidelines outlining standard of care for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), national and regional guidelines are lacking, resulting in variations in patient management between regions. We retrospectively analyzed patient characteristics and management data from the Adelphi Real World NASH Disease Specific Programme™ for patients with NASH in the EU5, Canada, and the Middle East to identify gaps between real-world practice and that advocated by reference guidelines, irrespective of clinician awareness or consultation of guidelines. METHODS: We performed an analysis of physicians (hepatologists, gastroenterologists, diabetologists) and their patients diagnosed with NASH. Physicians completed patient record forms for the next 5 consulting patients, collecting information on patient care, including diagnosis and disease management. RESULTS: ultrasound and transient elastography), and tests to exclude other conditions was suboptimal. Although lifestyle advice was widely provided, patients were less commonly referred to diet, exercise, and lifestyle specialists. Two-thirds of patients were receiving off-label treatment for NASH or associated underlying conditions with the aim of improving NASH, most commonly statins, metformin, and vitamin E. CONCLUSION: Real-world NASH management approaches differ across regions and from proposed standard of care represented by reference multidisciplinary guidelines. Establishment and awareness of, and adherence to regional and national guidelines may improve identification and management of patients with NASH and potentially improve outcomes in this population. LAY SUMMARY: Although reference guidelines are available to guide the management of patients with NASH, these are not widely used and there is a lack of national guidelines. Our study shows how clinical practice in the EU, Canada, and Middle East differs from proposed standard of care, particularly relating to how patients are diagnosed and treated. Wider establishment of, awareness of, and reference to guidelines may improve how physicians identify and manage patients with NASH.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.382 · 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