ArticleDigestion2025
Implementation of Machine Learning Algorithms to Screen for Advanced Liver Fibrosis in Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease: An In-Depth Explanatory Analysis.
Article in Digestion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of machine learning and deep learning in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of advanced research · 2026Pooled it
- An Explainable AI Tool (FibroX) for Detecting Advanced Liver Fibrosis in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Protocol for a Pilot Crossover Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular Implications in Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD): A State-of-the-Art Review.Korean circulation journal · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: Transforming diagnosis and therapeutic approaches.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Fibrosis Diagnosis in Metabolic-Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A comprehensive narrative review of artificial intelligence use in the diagnosis and management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease as a systemic disorder: extrahepatic manifestations and the need for data-driven phenotyping.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- The application of artificial intelligence in the intersection of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and cardiovascular diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD): Mechanisms, Clinical Implications and Therapeutic Advances.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2025Review
- Liver biopsy in the modern era: from traditional techniques to artificial intelligence and multi-omics integration.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to train machine learning algorithms (MLAs) to detect advanced fibrosis (AF) in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) patients at the level of primary care setting and to explain the predictions to ensure responsible use by clinicians.
methodsReadily available features of 618 MASLD patients followed up at a tertiary center were used to train five MLAs. AF was defined as liver stiffness ≥9.3 kPa, measured via 2-dimension shear wave elastography (n = 495) or liver biopsy ≥F3 (n = 123). MLAs were compared to Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) fibrosis score (NFS) on 540 MASLD patients from the primary care setting as validation. Feature importance, partial dependence, and shapely additive explanations (SHAPs) were utilized for explanation.
resultsExtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) achieved an AUC = 0.91, outperforming FIB-4 (AUC = 0.78) and NFS (AUC = 0.81, both p < 0.05) with specificity = 76% versus 59% and 48% for FIB-4 ≥1.3 and NFS ≥-1.45, respectively (p < 0.05). Its sensitivity (91%) was superior to FIB-4 (79%). XGBoost confidently excluded AF (negative predictive value = 99%) with the highest positive predictive value (31%), superior to FIB-4 and NFS (all p < 0.05). The most important features were HbA1c and gamma glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) with a steep increase in AF probability at HbA1c >6.5%. The strongest interaction was between AST and age. XGBoost, but not logistic regression, extracted informative patterns from ALT, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and alkaline phosphatase (p < 0.001). One-quarter of the false positives (FPs) were correctly reclassified with only one additional false negative based on the SHAP values of GGT, platelets, and ALT which were found to be associated with a FP classification.
conclusionsAn explainable XGBoost algorithm was demonstrated superior to FIB-4 and NFS for screening of AF in MASLD patients at the primary care setting. The algorithm also proved safe for use as clinicians can understand the predictions and flag FP classifications.
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.