MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396574512 · doi:10.1097/hc9.0000000000000413

Pragmatic strategies to address health disparities along the continuum of care in chronic liver disease

2024· review· en· W4396574512 on OpenAlexaff
Mayur Brahmania, Shari S. Rogal, Marina Serper, Arpan Patel, David S. Goldberg, Amit K. Mathur, Julius Wilder, Jennifer Vittorio, Andrew D. Yeoman, Nicole E. Rich, Mariana Lazo, Ani Kardashian, Sumeet K. Asrani, Ashley Spann, Nneka N. Ufere, Manisha Verma, Elizabeth C. Verna, Dinee C. Simpson, Jesse D. Schold, Russell Rosenblatt, Lisa M. McElroy, Sharad I. Wadwhani, Tzu‐Hao Lee, Alexandra T. Strauss, Raymond T. Chung, Ignacio Aiza, Rotonya M. Carr, Jin Mo Yang, Carla W. Brady, Brett E. Fortune

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology Communications · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsChronic liver diseaseHealth equityLiver transplantationSocioeconomic statusMedicineHealth careEthnic groupEquity (law)CirrhosisLiver diseaseDiseaseChronic diseaseNatural historyFamily medicineIntensive care medicineTransplantationPolitical sciencePathologyEnvironmental healthPublic healthInternal medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities exist in the prevalence and natural history of chronic liver disease, access to care, and clinical outcomes. Solutions to improve health equity range widely, from digital health tools to policy changes. The current review outlines the disparities along the chronic liver disease health care continuum from screening and diagnosis to the management of cirrhosis and considerations of pre-liver and post-liver transplantation. Using a health equity research and implementation science framework, we offer pragmatic strategies to address barriers to implementing high-quality equitable care for patients with chronic liver disease.

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 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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatology CommunicationsSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207