Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3,203

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The NAFLD fibrosis score: A noninvasive system that identifies liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD†

Open access
Angulo, Paul, Hui, Jason M., Marchesini, Giulio, Bugianesi, Ellisabetta, George, Jacob, Farrell, Geoffrey C., Enders, Felicity, Saksena, Sushma, Burt, Alastair D., Bida, John P., Lindor, Keith, Sanderson, Schuyler O., Lenzi, Marco, Adams, Leon A., Kench, James, Therneau, Terry M., Day, Christopher P.·2007·Hepatology
DOI 10.1002/hep.21496
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and advanced liver fibrosis are at the highest risk for progressing to end-stage liver disease. We constructed and validated a scoring system consisting of routinely measured and readily available clinical and laboratory data to separate NAFLD patients with and without advanced fibrosis. A total of 733 patients with NAFLD confirmed by liver biopsy were divided into 2 groups to construct (n = 480) and validate (n = 253) a scoring system. Routine demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables were analyzed by multivariate modeling to predict presence or absence of advanced fibrosis. Age, hyperglycemia, body mass index, platelet count, albumin, and AST/ALT ratio were independent indicators of advanced liver fibrosis. A scoring system with these 6 variables had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.88 and 0.82 in the estimation and validation groups, respectively. By applying the low cutoff score (-1.455), advanced fibrosis could be excluded with high accuracy (negative predictive value of 93% and 88% in the estimation and validation groups, respectively). By applying the high cutoff score (0.676), the presence of advanced fibrosis could be diagnosed with high accuracy (positive predictive value of 90% and 82% in the estimation and validation groups, respectively). By applying this model, a liver biopsy would have been avoided in 549 (75%) of the 733 patients, with correct prediction in 496 (90%). CONCLUSION: a simple scoring system accurately separates patients with NAFLD with and without advanced fibrosis, rendering liver biopsy for identification of advanced fibrosis unnecessary in a substantial proportion of patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.21496

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Angulo, P., Hui, J. M., Marchesini, G., Bugianesi, E., George, J., Farrell, G. C., Enders, F., Saksena, S., Burt, A. D., Bida, J. P., Lindor, K., Sanderson, S. O., Lenzi, M., Adams, L. A., Kench, J., Therneau, T. M., & Day, C. P.
Venue
Hepatology
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2007-04
Volume
45
Issue
4
Pages
846-854
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1002/hep.21496
OpenAlex
W2112496618
Cited by
3,203
References
3
FWCI
42.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.