Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in Filipino North American patients: Results from a multi-ethnic cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is more prevalent in certain ethnicities due to a combination of genetic, environmental, and metabolic factors. North American Filipino populations may have lifestyle and metabolic risk factors for NAFLD; however, the prevalence of NAFLD in this group is unknown. We sought to determine whether Filipino patients are over-represented in a multi-ethnic NAFLD cohort and describe their clinical presentation, primarily compared to other ethnicities in the same geographical region and secondarily compared to Manila-based Filipino patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with patients with NAFLD who were followed at the Hepatology Clinic at Vancouver General Hospital, Canada, from January 2015 to August 2018. Data were extracted for clinicodemographic data, ethnicity, anthropometric measures, blood work, and transient elastography (TE). External comparison data was obtained online from the Metro Vancouver census and a NAFLD study conducted in Manila, Philippines. RESULTS: Of 317 patients meeting inclusion criteria for the study, 224 patients had complete datasets. The mean age was 51.1 years, and 50% were female. There were 139 (62%) Caucasian and other ethnicity patients, 55 (25%) Asian patients, and 30 (13%) Filipino patients. Compared to other ethnic groups, the Filipino group had similar clinical characteristics, including NAFLD fibrosis scores and TE. Of included NAFLD patients, the proportion of Filipino patients (13.39%) was significantly greater than the proportion of Filipino residents in Metro Vancouver (5.52%, p <0.01). Our Filipino Canadians seemed to be younger, with fewer females and a lower proportion of diabetes mellitus, but a higher proportion of hypertension than the previously reported cohort from Manila. CONCLUSIONS: While Filipino patients have not previously been examined in multi-ethnic NAFLD studies, they may represent a high-risk population. Further research is needed to clarify the prevalence and presentation of NAFLD in Filipino Canadian patients, as this appears to be a significant health issue in this community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".