The impact of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease on inflammatory bowel disease-related hospitalization outcomes: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence suggests that patients with inflammatory bowel disease are at higher risk of developing nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). However, there is limited information currently available on how NAFLD may affect the clinical course of IBD. Thus, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate the impact of NAFLD on IBD-related hospitalization outcomes. All observational studies assessing IBD-related hospitalization outcomes in patients with NAFLD were included. Exclusion criteria were studies published in languages other than English or French, or those involving pediatric population. Outcomes included IBD-related hospitalization and readmission rates, need for surgery, length of stay, inpatient mortality, and costs. Overall, 3252 citations were retrieved and seven studies met the inclusion criteria (1 574 937 patients); all were observational, of high quality, and originated in the United States. Measurable outcomes reported in these studies were few and with insufficient similarity across studies to complete a quantitative assessment. Only one study reports NAFLD severity. Two studies suggested a higher rate of hospitalization for patients with both NAFLD and IBD compared to IBD alone (incidence rate ratio of 1.54; 95% confidence interval: 1.33-1.79). This is the first systematic review to date that evaluates any possible association of NAFLD with IBD-related hospitalization outcomes. Despite the paucity and low quality of available data, our findings indicate that NAFLD may be associated with worse outcomes amongst IBD patients (especially Crohn's disease). Further and higher certainty of evidence is needed for better characterization of such clinical impact.
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 | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".