Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 390

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Analysis of factors predictive of mortality in alcoholic hepatitis and derivation and validation of the Glasgow alcoholic hepatitis score

Open access
Forrest, E H, Evans, C D J, Stewart, S, Phillips, M, Oo, Y H, McAvoy, N C, Fisher, N C, Singhal, S, Brind, A, Haydon, G, O’Grady, J, Day, C P, Hayes, P C, Murray, L S, Morris, A J·2005·Gut

Abstract

Introduction: Alcoholic hepatitis is associated with a high short term mortality. We aimed to identify those factors associated with mortality and define a simple score which would predict outcome in our population. Methods: We identified 241 patients with alcoholic hepatitis. Clinical and laboratory data were recorded on the day of admission (day 1) and on days 6–9. Stepwise logistic regression was used to identify variables related to outcome at 28 days and 84 days after admission. These variables were included in the Glasgow alcoholic hepatitis score (GAHS) and its ability to predict outcome assessed. The GAHS was validated in a separate dataset of 195 patients. Results: The GAHS was derived from five variables independently associated with outcome: age (p = 0.001) and, from day 1 results, serum bilirubin (p<0.001), blood urea (p = 0.019) and, from day 6–9 results, serum bilirubin (p<0.001), prothrombin time (p = 0.002), and peripheral blood white blood cell count (p = 0.001). The GAHS on day 1 had an overall accuracy of 81% when predicting 28 day outcome. In contrast, the modified discriminant function had an overall accuracy of 49%. Similar results were found using information at 6–9 days and when predicting 84 day outcome. The accuracy of the GAHS was confirmed by the validation study of 195 patients The GAHS was equally accurate irrespective of the use of the international normalised ratio or prothrombin time ratio, or if the diagnosis of alcoholic hepatitis was biopsy proven or on the basis of clinical assessment. Conclusions: Using variables associated with mortality we have derived and validated an accurate scoring system to assess outcome in alcoholic hepatitis. This score was able to identify patients at greatest risk of death throughout their admission.

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 · 10.1136/gut.2004.050781

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.

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

Cited by

See all 390

Metadata

Authors
Forrest, E. H., Evans, C. D. J., Stewart, S., Phillips, M., Oo, Y. H., McAvoy, N. C., Fisher, N. C., Singhal, S., Brind, A., Haydon, G., O’Grady, J., Day, C. P., Hayes, P. C., Murray, L. S., & Morris, A. J.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2005-07-11
Volume
54
Issue
8
Pages
1174-1179
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2107306217
Cited by
390
References
0
FWCI
6.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Analysis of factors predictive of mortality in alcoholic hepatitis and derivation and validation of the Glasgow alcoholic hepatitis score. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2004.050781
The paper
Forrest, E. H., Evans, C. D. J., Stewart, S., Phillips, M., Oo, Y. H., McAvoy, N. C., Fisher, N. C., Singhal, S., Brind, A., Haydon, G., O’Grady, J., Day, C. P., Hayes, P. C., Murray, L. S., & Morris, A. J. (2005). Analysis of factors predictive of mortality in alcoholic hepatitis and derivation and validation of the Glasgow alcoholic hepatitis score. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2004.050781

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.