ArticleWorld journal of hepatology2026
Performance of three clinical scores for steatosis and steatohepatitis and their interaction with metabolic syndrome in obese individuals.
Article in World journal of hepatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive clinical scores are widely used to detect hepatic steatosis and steatohepatitis, but their accuracy in individuals with obesity is limited. Most of these tools were developed for non-obese populations and do not account for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) spectrum. Moreover, the potential modifying effect of metabolic syndrome (MetS) on the diagnostic performance of these scores remains unclear. Given the global burden of obesity and MASLD, there is a pressing need to refine diagnostic strategies for early detection. We hypothesized that diagnostic performance may vary by MetS status and can be improved with adjusted thresholds.
aimTo evaluate and optimize three clinical scores for steatosis and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), including assessment by MetS status.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 95 individuals undergoing bariatric surgery at a hospital in Brazil. Clinical scores [non-alcoholic fatty liver disease liver fat score (NLFS), hepatic steatosis index (HSI), and fatty liver index (FLI)] were calculated from preoperative data. Liver biopsy was used as the reference standard to assess steatosis and MASH. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and optimal cut-offs were determined by Youden's index. Logistic regression with interaction terms assessed whether MetS modified the diagnostic performance of each score across histological outcomes.
resultsSixty-six individuals (69.5%) had steatosis, and fifteen (15.8%) had moderate-to-severe steatosis and MASH. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for any steatosis was 0.676 (NLFS), 0.540 (HSI), and 0.468 (FLI); for moderate-to-severe steatosis, 0.671 (NLFS), 0.659 (HSI), and 0.700 (FLI); and for MASH, 0.671 (NLFS), 0.625 (HSI), and 0.639 (FLI). Standard cut-offs performed poorly; optimized thresholds improved both sensitivity and specificity. NLFS outperformed FLI for any steatosis (
conclusionNLFS, HSI, and FLI show limited accuracy in obese individuals. Adjusting thresholds improves performance. Diagnostic utility remains consistent regardless of MetS, supporting their use across the MASLD spectrum.
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.