Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25165830›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

The diagnostic value of the FIB-4 index for staging hepatitis B-related fibrosis: a meta-analysis.

Yuanyuan Li, Yu Chen, Ying Zhao

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Fontan-Associated Liver Disease.Seminars in liver disease · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Fibrosis evaluation in chronic hepatitis B: FIB-6 score.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2024
    Article
  11. Validation of FIB-6 score in assessment of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2024
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yuanyuan LiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of the Medical College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Yu ChenDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of the Medical College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Ying ZhaoDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of the Medical College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiver fibrosis stage is an important factor in determining prognosis and need for treatment in patients infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Liver biopsies are typically used to assess liver fibrosis; however, noninvasive alternatives such as the FIB-4 index have also been developed.

aimsTo quantify the accuracy of the FIB-4 index in the diagnosis of HBV related fibrosis and cirrhosis.

methodsA meta-analysis of studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of the FIB-4 index vs. liver biopsy in HBV-infected patients was performed using studies retrieved from the following databases: PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and the Chinese Biology Medicine disc. A hierarchical summary receiver operating curves model and bivariate model were used to produce summary receiver operating characteristic curves and pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. The heterogeneity was explored with meta-regression analysis. Publication bias was detected using Egger's test and the trim and fill method.

results12 studies (N = 1,908) and 10 studies (N = 2,105) were included in the meta-analysis for significant fibrosis and cirrhosis, respectively. For significant fibrosis, the area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating curve (AUHSROC) was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74-0.81). The recommended cutoff value was between 1.45 and 1.62, and the AUHSROC, summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74-0.81), 0.65 (95% CI = 0.56-0.73) and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.7-0.83), respectively. For cirrhosis, the AUHSROC was 0.89 (95% CI = 0.85-0.91). The recommended cutoff value was between 2.9 and 3.6, and the AUHSROC, summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.96 (95% CI = 0.92-1.00), 0.42 (95% CI = 0.36-0.48) and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.95-0.97), respectively. No publication bias was detected.

conclusionsThe FIB-4 index is valuable for detecting significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in HBV-infected patients, but has suboptimal accuracy in excluding fibrosis and cirrhosis.

Indexed as

Alanine TransaminaseAspartate AminotransferasesHepatitis BHumansLiverLiver CirrhosisSensitivity and SpecificityAlanine TransaminaseAspartate Aminotransferases

Identifiers

PMID25165830
PMCPMC4148327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.