ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparing ultrasound-derived fat fraction and CT for diagnosing hepatic steatosis: an MRI-PDFF reference study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study directly compares the diagnostic performance of two routinely available, non-invasive techniques-ultrasound-derived fat fraction (UDFF) and non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT)-for screening and grading hepatic steatosis (HS). In addition, it exploratorily assesses the utility of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) for quantifying liver fat content. Methods: In this prospective single-center study, 78 patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) were recruited and underwent NCCT, ultrasound [UDFF and Automatic Point Shear Wave Elastography (Auto-pSWE)], and magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) within 1 week. The same cohort was analyzed using two different MRI-PDFF threshold criteria: the primary set and the alternative set. In the primary set, Spearman's correlation coefficients assessed relationships among UDFF, CT liver-to-spleen attenuation ratio [CT(L/S)], LSM, and MRI-PDFF. The diagnostic performance of UDFF and CT(L/S) for grading HS was evaluated using ROC curves with bootstrap AUC comparisons. Agreement and reliability were assessed using ICC and kappa statistics, and influencing factors were examined by logistic regression. In the alternative set, the diagnostic performance of UDFF and CT(L/S) for grading steatosis was similarly evaluated using ROC curves with bootstrap AUC comparisons. Results: After excluding three patients, 75 were included in the final analysis. In the primary set, for HS ≥ S1, UDFF (AUC = 0.926; cutoff 8.5%) outperformed CT(L/S) (AUC = 0.826; cutoff 0.95; Conclusion: UDFF outperforms CT(L/S) in steatosis grading and reliability but is limited to the Siemens DAX probe, whereas CT(L/S) is equipment-independent but less reliable.
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.