Steroid Use and Risk of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
GOALS: We sought to evaluate the association of steroids with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). BACKGROUND: Patients with IBD are at increased risk of NAFLD. Steroids may have a role in the pathogenesis of NAFLD. STUDY: We searched MEDLINE (through PubMed) and Embase for studies from inception to July 2021. We included published interventional and observational studies of adults 18 years or older with ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease. We reported odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals, and generated forest plots. A random effects model generated a summary effect estimate. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot and Egger's test. Study quality was examined using modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). RESULTS: A total of 12 observational studies with 3497 participants were included. NAFLD was identified in 1017 (29.1%) patients. The pooled odds ratio for the development of NAFLD in steroid users versus non-users was 0.87 (95% confidence interval: 0.72-1.04). There was no significant heterogeneity between studies ( I ²=0.00%, P =0.13). No publication bias was detected by funnel plot or Egger's test ( P =0.24). Findings were consistent among subgroup analyses stratified by study quality. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, steroids were not associated with NAFLD in patients with IBD. Steroids may not need to be withheld from patients with IBD for the purposes of preventing NAFLD. Additional prospective studies that systematically document steroid exposure and important confounders among patients with IBD are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".