Cystic fibrosis screening, evaluation, and management of hepatobiliary disease consensus recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cystic fibrosis (CF) may cause a spectrum of hepatobiliary complications, including portal hypertension, multilobular cirrhosis, and liver failure. Current guidelines on the detection and monitoring of hepatobiliary complications in CF were published in 1999. The CF Foundation assembled a committee to evaluate research advances and formulate revised guidelines for CF-associated liver disease. A committee of hepatologists, gastroenterologists, pulmonologists, pharmacists, nurses, dietitians, individuals with CF, and the parents of a child with CF devised "population, intervention, comparison, and outcome" questions regarding hepatobiliary disease in CF. PubMed literature searches were performed for each population, intervention, comparison, and outcome question. Recommendations were voted on with 80% agreement required to approve a recommendation. Public comment on initial recommendations was solicited prior to the formulation of final recommendations. Thirty-one population, intervention, comparison, and outcome questions were assembled, 6401 manuscripts were title screened for relevance, with 1053 manuscripts undergoing detailed full-text review. Seven recommendations were approved for screening, 13 for monitoring of existing disease, and 14 for treatment of CF-associated hepatobiliary involvement or advanced liver disease. One recommendation on liver biopsy did not meet the 80% threshold. One recommendation on screening ultrasound was revised and re-voted on. Through a multidisciplinary committee and public engagement, we have assembled updated recommendations and guidance on screening, monitoring, and treatment of CF-associated hepatobiliary involvement and advanced liver disease. While research gaps remain, we anticipate that these recommendations will lead to improvements in CF outcomes through earlier detection and increased evidence-based approaches to monitoring and treatment.
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 | 0.047 | 0.132 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.007 |
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".