MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409788151 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v14n7p76

Role of Liv.52 in Non-Infectious Chronic Liver Disease

2022· article· en· W4409788151 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khalid A. Al-Khazraji, Ali Khalid, Mohammed Kamal Hashim, Mahmood Kamal Hashim, Safia Khalid Abdulla, Mohammed Khalid Abdulla, Issam Hadi Khudhair, Wissam Khudhair Abbas

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic diseaseDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Intensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic liver diseases (CLDs) are a group of illnesses characterized by hepatic insufficiency associated with abnormal liver function tests (LFTs). Although plethora traditional pharmacological drugs are available, they have many limitations either in their efficiency or adverse effects. AIMS: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of herbal Liv.52 supplement in the treatment of chronic liver disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An interventional randomized blind clinical trial was conducted on a total of 200 patients with chronic liver disease. Patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. Group A, 100 patients who received Liv.52 supplement alongside their usual therapy regime. Group B, 100 patients with no Liv.52 supplement and restricted for their usual therapy regime. Patients were followed up for 6 months for clinical assessment, with laboratory investigations to assess routine blood chemistry and liver function tests were done after 1, 2 and 6 months of therapy. RESULTS: After 6 months of treatment, the mean alanine transaminase (ALT) in treated group was 56.54±24.32 U/L which was significantly lower than that of controls (70.39±27.74 U/L). On the other hand, the mean serum albumin after six months’ treatment was 3.54±0.52 g/dL in treated group compared with 2.96±0.36 g/dL in controls with highly significant difference. After two month’s treatment, the mean total leukocyte (WBC) count in treated group was 7.37±1.49 × 10 /ml which was significantly lower than that of controls (8.11±1.38 ×103/ml). In contrast, hemoglobin (Hb) was significantly higher in treated group than controls at one, two- and six-months’ post treatment with significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Liv.52 has a hepato-protective effect in patients with chronic non-infectious hepatitis as well as having extrahepatic effects through reducing total leukocyte count and increasing the hemoglobin. There was no evidence of short-term adverse effect of Liv.52.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→