Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37153139›Full record

ReviewFaculty reviews2023

Recent advances in NAFLD: current areas of contention.

Erica Jennison, Christopher D Byrne

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Faculty reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Erica JennisonChemical Pathology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6521-4937
Christopher D ByrneHuman Development and Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6322-7753
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This brief review focuses on two contentious issues within the field of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD); the first is the recent effort to redefine NAFLD as metabolic (dysfunction)-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). The modification of "NAFLD" to "MAFLD" is expected to highlight the role of metabolic factors in the disease aetiology, which is hoped to improve patient understanding of the disease, facilitate patient-physician communication and highlight the importance of public health interventions in prevention and management. The diagnostic criteria for MAFLD allow it to coexist with other forms of liver disease, which recognises that metabolic dysfunction contributes towards disease progression in other liver pathologies, such as alcoholic liver disease. However, there remain concerns that renaming NAFLD may be premature without fully considering the broader implications, from diagnostic criteria to trial endpoints; therefore, the new definition has not yet been accepted by major societies. Another contentious issue within the field is the gap in our understanding of how patients undergoing therapeutic interventions should be monitored to assess amelioration/attenuation or the worsening of their liver disease. Biomarker scoring systems (such as the ELF test and FIB-4 test) and imaging techniques (such as transient elastography [TE] and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] techniques) are proven to be reasonably accurate, and comparable with histology, in the diagnosis of NAFLD and evaluation of disease severity; however, their use in monitoring the response of disease to therapeutic interventions is not well established. Whilst biomarker scoring systems and TE are limited by poor diagnostic accuracy in detecting moderate fibrosis (e.g. F2 liver fibrosis defined by histology), more accurate MRI techniques are not practical for routine patient follow-up due to their expense and limited availability. More work is required to determine the most appropriate method by which therapeutic interventions for NAFLD should be monitored in clinical practice.

Indexed as

liver fibrosisMAFLDmetabolic syndromeNAFLDtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID37153139
PMCPMC10155199
OpenAlexW4367853430

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.