The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reliability of causality assessment for drug, herbal and dietary supplement hepatotoxicity in the Drug‐Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN)
Abstract
Background & Aims: Because of the lack of objective tests to diagnose drug‐induced liver injury (DILI), causality assessment is a matter of debate. Expert opinion is often used in research and industry, but its test–retest reliability is unknown. To determine the test–retest reliability of the expert opinion process used by the Drug‐Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN). Methods: Three DILIN hepatologists adjudicate suspected hepatotoxicity cases to one of five categories representing levels of likelihood of DILI. Adjudication is based on retrospective assessment of gathered case data that include prospective follow‐up information. One hundred randomly selected DILIN cases were re‐assessed using the same processes for initial assessment but by three different reviewers in 92% of cases. Results: The median time between assessments was 938 days (range 140–2352). Thirty‐one cases involved >1 agent. Weighted kappa statistics for overall case and individual agent category agreement were 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50–0.71) and 0.60 (0.52–0.68) respectively. Overall case adjudications were within one category of each other 93% of the time, while 5% differed by two categories and 2% differed by three categories. Fourteen per cent crossed the 50% threshold of likelihood owing to competing diagnoses or atypical timing between drug exposure and injury. Conclusions: The DILIN expert opinion causality assessment method has moderate interobserver reliability but very good agreement within one category. A small but important proportion of cases could not be reliably diagnosed as ≥50% likely to be DILI.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
“This approach has been shown to be as useful as the RUCAM, although expert opinion is rarely available in routine clinical practice.117”
From AASLD practice guidance on drug, herbal, and dietary supplement–induced liver injury (2023) · cites this paper as [117]
In the citing paper
“Structured expert opinion: The semiquantitative scale developed by DILIN categorizes the likelihood of DILI into five probability groups that vary from < 25% to > 95% probability (Table 6).74,116,117”
From AASLD practice guidance on drug, herbal, and dietary supplement–induced liver injury (2023) · cites this paper as [117]
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
Simplified criteria for the diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis
Hennes, E. M., Zeniya, M., Czaja, A. J., Parés, A., Dalekos, G. N., Krawitt, E. L., Bittencourt, P. L., Porta, G., Boberg, K. M., Hofer, H., et al. (2008) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.22322 · Cited by 1,901
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- 10.1002/hep.1840400403 · DOI
- 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90101-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90102-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/hep.510260319 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/hep.22442 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2165/00002018-200932010-00005 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.02.008 · DOI
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.07.051 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.02.007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/hep.20535 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/hep.20701 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03504.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.09.011 · DOI · Paper page
- Zimmerman HJ, 1999, Hepatotoxicity: The Adverse Effects of Drugs and Other Chemicals on the Liver, 611
- 10.1002/hep.21324 · DOI
- Verma S, 2007, Drug‐Induced Liver Disease, 547
- 10.1136/bmj.319.7224.1541 · DOI
- 10.1097/MEG.0b013e3283603e89 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.02.008 · DOI
- 10.14218/JCTH.2013.D002X · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Andrade, R. J., Chalasani, N., Björnsson, E. S., Suzuki, A., Kullak-Ublick, G. A., Watkins, P. B., Devarbhavi, H., Merz, M., Lucena, M. I., Kaplowitz, N., et al. (2019) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-019-0105-0 · Cited by 924
Self-citationAASLD practice guidance on drug, herbal, and dietary supplement–induced liver injury
Fontana, R. J., Liou, I., Reuben, A., Suzuki, A., Fiel, M. I., Lee, W., & Navarro, V. (2023) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.32689 · Cited by 340
Self-citationFeatures of autoimmune hepatitis in patients with drug-induced liver injury
de Boer, Y. S., Kosinski, A. S., Urban, T. J., Zhao, Z., Long, N., Chalasani, N., Kleiner, D. E., & Hoofnagle, J. H. (2017) · Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2016.05.043 · Cited by 190
Self-citationHepatotoxicity of green tea: an update
Mazzanti, G., Di Sotto, A., & Vitalone, A. (2015) · Archives of Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00204-015-1521-x · Cited by 189
Drug-induced liver injury: Asia Pacific Association of Study of Liver consensus guidelines
Devarbhavi, H., Aithal, G., Treeprasertsuk, S., Takikawa, H., Mao, Y., Shasthry, S. M., Hamid, S., Tan, S. S., Philips, C. A., George, J., et al. (2021) · Hepatology International · doi:10.1007/s12072-021-10144-3 · Cited by 181
Metadata
- Authors
- Hayashi, P. H., Barnhart, H. X., Fontana, R. J., Chalasani, N., Davern, T. J., Talwalkar, J. A., Reddy, K. R., Stolz, A. A., Hoofnagle, J. H., & Rockey, D. C.
- Affiliations
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology University of North Carolina Chapel Hill NC USA
- Duke Clinical Research Institute & Department of Biostatistics Duke University Durham NC USA
- Division of Gastroenterology University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI USA
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Indiana University School of Medicine Indianapolis IN USA
- Division of Gastroenterology California Pacific Medical Center San Francisco CA USA
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Mayo Clinic Rochester MN USA
- Division of Gastroenterology University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA
- Division of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases University of Southern California Los Angeles CA USA
- Liver Disease Research Branch Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) NIH Bethesda MD USA
- Division of Gastroenterology University of Texas Southwestern Dallas TX USA
- Venue
- Liver International
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-04-16
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1623-1632
- ISSN
- 1478-3223
- 1478-3231
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
- Funders
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (2U01-DK065176-06, 2U01-DK065201-06, 2U01-DK065184-06, 2U01-DK065211-06, 5U01DK065193-04, 5U01-DK065238-08, 1U01-DK083023-01, 1U01-DK083027-01, 1U01-DK082992-01, 1U01-DK083020-01)
- CTSA (UL1 RR025761, UL1 RR025747, UL1 RR024134, UL1 RR024986, UL1 RR024982, UL1 RR024150)
- National Cancer Institute
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reliability of causality assessment for drug, herbal and dietary supplement hepatotoxicity in the Drug‐Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/liv.12540
- The paper
- Hayashi, P. H., Barnhart, H. X., Fontana, R. J., Chalasani, N., Davern, T. J., Talwalkar, J. A., Reddy, K. R., Stolz, A. A., Hoofnagle, J. H., & Rockey, D. C. (2015). Reliability of causality assessment for drug, herbal and dietary supplement hepatotoxicity in the Drug‐Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN). Liver International. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.12540
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.
