Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40093587›Full record

ReviewGastroenterology report2025

Prediction of major liver-related events in the population using prognostic models.

Fredrik Åberg, Ville Männistö

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gastroenterology report, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Fredrik ÅbergTransplantation and Liver Surgery Unit, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Ville MännistöSchool of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liver disease poses a significant global health burden, with steatotic liver disease related to metabolic dysfunction and/or alcohol use being the most prevalent type. Current risk stratification strategies emphasize detecting advanced fibrosis as a surrogate marker for liver-related events (LREs), such as hospitalization, liver cancer, or death. However, fibrosis alone does not adequately predict imminent outcomes, particularly in fast-progressing individuals without advanced fibrosis at evaluation. This underscores the need for models designed specifically to predict LREs, enabling timely interventions. The Chronic Liver Disease (CLivD) risk score, the dynamic aspartate aminotransferase-to-alanine aminotransferase ratio (dAAR), and the Cirrhosis Outcome Risk Estimator (CORE) were explicitly developed to predict LRE risk rather than detect fibrosis. Derived from general population cohorts, these models incorporate either standard liver enzymes (dAAR and CORE) or risk factors (CLivD), enabling broad application in primary care and population-based settings. They directly estimate the risk of future LREs, improving on traditional fibrosis-focused approaches. Conversely, widely used models like the Fibrosis-4 index and newer ones, such as the LiverRisk and LiverPRO scores, were initially developed to detect significant/advanced fibrosis or liver stiffness. While not designed for LRE prediction, they have later been analyzed for this purpose. Integrating fibrosis screening with LRE-focused models like CLivD, dAAR, and CORE can help healthcare systems adopt proactive, preventive care. This approach emphasizes identifying individuals at imminent risk of severe outcomes, potentially ensuring better resource allocation and personalized interventions.

Indexed as

chronic liver diseasecirrhosisCLivDliver-related eventspredictionprognosis

Identifiers

PMID40093587
PMCPMC11908767

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.