ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
An Australian Community-Based Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease Care Pathway for People with Type 2 Diabetes: Barriers and Considerations.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. 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
Background: Although clinical guidelines endorse screening for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) with advanced fibrosis in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the feasibility of and barriers and considerations relevant to implementing this approach in the community remain unclear. Methods: Sequential adults with T2D attending selected community clinics during 2021-2023 were invited to receive a "liver health check" (n=543). A further 95 participants were referred directly from their general practitioner (GP) or self-referred to the study. A total of 302 participants underwent a point of care assessment of hepatic steatosis and stiffness (FibroScan) and were advised to see their GP to discuss the results. "Template" letters containing key results, their interpretation and advice about management of cardiometabolic risk, patient follow-up and referral criteria, were sent to participants' GPs. Results: Referral to a tertiary liver clinic was advised in GP letters for 45 (15%) participants with an increased risk of clinically significant fibrosis (liver stiffness measurement ≥8), 15 participants with 'red flags' (eg splenomegaly, thrombocytopenia) and 2 with unsuccessful FibroScan examinations. A referral from GPs to the liver clinic was received for 27 (44%) of these 62 participants. Approximately 90% of GPs rated the "template" letters favourably on a Likert rating scale. Conclusion: The low rate of participation in the "liver health check" and liver clinic referral reflects a real-world scenario and may stem from societal under-recognition and engagement with MASLD, competing health priorities or under-appreciation of the link between liver fibrosis severity and mortality risk. Further studies need to address strategies to enhance participation in liver health assessments and determine their impact on liver-related morbidity/mortality and overall survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.