MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409141024 · doi:10.1155/cjgh/6455092

Alcohol Use Disorder Pharmacotherapy in Patients With Alcohol‐Related Liver Disease: A Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4409141024 on OpenAlexaff
Manisha Jogendran, Louis Huynh, Jennifer A. Flemming

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacotherapyAlcohol use disorderMedicineAlcoholLiver diseaseAlcoholic liver diseaseDiseasePsychiatryIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCirrhosisChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Alcohol‐associated liver disease (ALD) is one of the most common causes of cirrhosis. Pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder (AUD) can improve abstinence rates in patients with cirrhosis, however, there is limited data on how these therapies affect liver‐related outcomes. Methods: A scoping review was completed using multiple electronic search databases. Articles exploring pharmacotherapy for AUD and outcomes for ALD were included. The primary outcome of this study was liver outcomes after receiving pharmacotherapy for AUD, including decompensated cirrhosis, mortality, progression of ALD, and need for liver transplantation. Results: A total of 2521 studies were screened and 3 were selected. A total of 45,948 patients were included, 43,863 (98%) of patients were male, and the mean age was 58.7. Only 2299 (5%) of patients received AUD pharmacotherapy. Receipt of AUD pharmacotherapy was found to be associated with decreased hepatic decompensation and mortality in 2 out of 3 studies. Conclusion: There are limited studies that explore AUD pharmacotherapy and ALD outcomes. Medications AUD may improve hepatic outcomes; however, further prospective studies need to be completed to explore this association.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.378
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology and HepatologySame topicAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsFrench-language works237,207