ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental hepatology
Determining Prognosis of ALD and Alcohol-associated Hepatitis.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental hepatology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phosphatidylethanol versus clinical criteria to diagnose alcohol use relapse after liver transplantation: a prospective cohort study.Hepatology international · 2026Review
- Article
- Current Pharmacotherapy and Nutrition Therapy of Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease.Clinics in liver disease · 2024Review
- Preoperative risk evaluation and optimization for patients with liver disease.Gastroenterology report · 2024Review
- Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease - From Pathogenesis to Treatment.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Alcohol-associated hepatitis has a poor prognosis in terms of short-term mortality and often presents with symptoms, such as jaundice, acute renal failure, and ascites. There are many prognostic models that have been developed to predict short-term and long-term mortality in these patients. Current prognostic models can be divided into static scores, which are measured at admission, and dynamic models, which measure baseline and after a certain amount of time. The efficacy of these models in predicting short-term mortality is disputed. Numerous studies across the world have compared prognostic models, such as the Maddrey's discriminant function, the model for end-stage liver disease score, model for end-stage liver disease score-Na, Glasgow alcohol-associated hepatitis score, and the age-bilirubin-international normalized ratio-creatinine (ABIC) score, to each other to determine which score is more useful for a particular context. There are also prognostic markers such as liver biopsy, breath biomarkers, and acute kidney injury that are able to predict mortality. The accuracy of these scores is a key to determining when treatment with corticosteroids is futile since there is an increased risk of infection in those treated with it. Furthermore, although these scores are helpful in predicting short-term mortality, the only factor that is able to predict long-term mortality in patients with alcohol-related liver disease is abstinence. Numerous studies have proven that even though corticosteroids provide a treatment for alcohol-associated hepatitis, it is a temporary one, at best. The purpose of this paper is to compare the historical models to current ones in their ability to predict mortality in patients with alcohol-related liver disease by analyzing multiple studies that have examined these prognostic markers. This paper also isolates the knowledge gaps in the ability to delineate which patients would benefit from corticosteroids and patients who would not and provides potential models for the future that could narrow this gap.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.