Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30877459›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2019

Diagnostic accuracy of hepatic proton density fat fraction measured by magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of liver steatosis with histology as reference standard: a meta-analysis.

Yali Qu, Mou Li, Gavin Hamilton, Yingzhen N Zhang, Bin Song

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. [Research progress on brucellosis combined with liver injury].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yali QuDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.
Mou LiDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China.
Gavin HamiltonLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Yingzhen N ZhangLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Bin SongDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. binsong65@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9227-8584
Sichuan University · CNUniversity of California San Diego · US

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81471658
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of hepatic magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) for the assessment of liver steatosis (LS) with histology as reference standard.

methodsA systematic literature search was performed to identify pertinent studies. Quality analyses were conducted by Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Diagnostic data were extracted and inconsistency index was calculated for LS≥G1, LS≥G2, and LS=G3, respectively. The area under summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) served as the indicator of diagnostic accuracy. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated if threshold effect was absent.

resultsThirteen studies containing 1100 subjects were included. There was significant threshold effect for LS≥G1. The AUCs for LS≥G1, LS≥G2, and LS=G3 were 0.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76, 1.00), 0.91 (95% CI 0.89, 0.94), and 0.92 (95% CI 0.89, 0.94), respectively. The pooled sensitivities for LS≥G2 and LS=G3 were 0.83 (95% CI 0.75, 0.88) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.63, 0.90), respectively; the pooled specificities for LS≥G2 and LS=G3 were 0.89 (95% CI 0.84, 0.92) and 0.89 (95% CI 0.84, 0.92), respectively.

conclusionsMRI-PDFF has high diagnostic accuracy at detecting and grading LS with histology as reference standard, suggesting that MRI-PDFF is able to provide an accurate quantification of LS in clinical trials and patient care. KEY POINT: • MRI-PDFF is able to provide an accurate quantification of LS in clinical trials and patient care.

Indexed as

BiopsyHumansLiverMagnetic Resonance ImagingNon-alcoholic Fatty Liver DiseaseReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveArea under curveFatty liverMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID30877459
OpenAlexW2920980943

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.