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
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“The Japanese scale was shown to accurately diagnose DILI and was superior to the Maria and Victorino scale.”
From Methods for causality assessment of idiosyncratic drug‐induced liver injury (2025) · cites this paper as [36]
Citations
Cites
Lee, W. M. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra021844 · Cited by 1,594
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Idiosyncratic drug hepatotoxicity
Kaplowitz, N. (2005) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd1750 · Cited by 1,054
Agreement Among Different Scales for Causality Assessment in Drug-Induced Liver Injury
Das, S., Behera, S. K., Xavier, A. S., Velupula, S., Dkhar, S. A., & Selvarajan, S. (2018) · Clinical Drug Investigation · doi:10.1007/s40261-017-0601-5 · Cited by 19
Methods for causality assessment of idiosyncratic drug‐induced liver injury
García‐Cortés, M., Matilla‐Cabello, G., & Lucena, M. I. (2025) · Liver International · doi:10.1111/liv.16083 · Cited by 15
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