Cited by 44

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validity study of a new diagnostic scale for drug-induced liver injury in Japan?comparison with two previous scales

WATANABE, M·2004·Hepatology Research

Abstract

There are no specific diagnostic markers for drug-induced liver injury (DILI), a disease that is unpredictable and occasionally fatal. A new diagnostic scale, the DDW-J scale, was recently proposed in Japan, by modifying the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) scale in the items concerning chronologic criteria, concomitant drug(s), and extrahepatic manifestations. In order to determine the validity of the DDW-J scale, we assessed 127 patients (81 patients with DILI and 46 control patients) received a total of 423 drugs. When patients were assessed as 'highly probable' or 'probable', the DDW-J scale had higher sensitivity and slightly lowers specificity than the ICM scale (93.8% versus 77.8% and 89.1% versus 100%). The DDW-J scale was able to accurately diagnose DILI in some cases that were overlooked using the ICM scale. While the weighted statistical test indicated a poor correlation between the ICM and the DDW-J scales, receiver operating characteristic curves revealed that these two were superior to the Maria and Victorino scale. Future work still must be done using statistical evidence to refine the weights of individual parameters. However, the results from our study indicate that the DDW-J scale is a powerful tool with potentially important clinical applications in the diagnosis of DILI.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.hepres.2004.08.005

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 44

Metadata

Authors
WATANABE, M.
Venue
Hepatology Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-11
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
148-154
ISSN
1386-6346
Cited by
44
References
1
Language
en

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