The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis
The enhanced liver fibrosis test (ELF) has been shown to accurately predict significant liver fibrosis in several liver diseases. To perform a meta-analysis to assess the performance of the ELF test for the assessment of liver fibrosis. Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studi...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2014-04, Vol.9 (4), p.e92772-e92772 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e92772 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | e92772 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 9 |
| creator | Xie, Qingsong Zhou, Xiaohu Huang, Pengfei Wei, Jianfeng Wang, Weilin Zheng, Shusen |
| description | The enhanced liver fibrosis test (ELF) has been shown to accurately predict significant liver fibrosis in several liver diseases.
To perform a meta-analysis to assess the performance of the ELF test for the assessment of liver fibrosis.
Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studies of the ELF test. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, pooled estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) were assessed systematically. The extent of heterogeneity and reasons for it were assessed.
Nine studies were identified for analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, and DOR values of ELF test, for assessment of significant liver fibrosis, were 83% (95% CI=0.80-0.86), 73% (95% CI=0.69-0.77), 4.00 (95% CI=2.50-6.39), 0.24 (95% CI=0.17-0.34), and 16.10 (95% CI=8.27-31.34), respectively; and, for evaluation of severe liver fibrosis, were 78% (95% CI=0.74-0.81), 76% (95% CI=0.73-0.78), 4.39 (95% CI=2.76-6.97), 0.27 (95% CI=0.16-0.46), and 16.01 (95% CI: 7.15-35.82), respectively; and, for estimation of cirrhosis, were 80% (95% CI=0.75-0.85), 71% (95% CI=0.68-0.74), 3.13 (95% CI=2.01-4.87), 0.29 (95% CI=0.19-0.44), and 14.09 (95% CI: 5.43-36.59), respectively.
The ELF test shows good performance and considerable diagnostic value for the prediction of histological fibrosis stage. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0092772 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1977747411</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A375582583</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_a9c9e5c49563410caa924ddbb4c6a162</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A375582583</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-d28680ed0d0bd39195c2e0e1af41466a108803939bf7839c4388996b7cd9f8d33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk11r1TAYx4sobk6_gWhBkO2ix7y0TeKFMMamBw4MdHob0iRtc2ibsyQd7tuberpxKruQXjQ8_f3_z0vzJMlbCFYQE_hpa0c3iG61s4NeAcAQIehZcgwZRlmJAH5-cD5KXnm_BaDAtCxfJkcoJ7gsIThO2ptWpzvtaut6MUid2jrVQzsdVdqZO-3S2lTOeuPT08vN1VkatA9pxNMQlT6IxgzNpFrCn1OR9jqITMQa72PgdfKiFp3Xb-b3SfLz6vLm4lu2uf66vjjfZJIUNGQK0ZICrYAClcIMskIiDTQUdQ7zshQQUAoww6yqCcVM5phSxsqKSMVqqjA-Sd7vfXed9XwekueQEUJykkMYifWeUFZs-c6ZXrh7boXhfwPWNVy4YGSnuWCS6ULmrChxDoEUgqFcqarKZSylRNHry5xtrHqtpB6CE93CdPllMC1v7B3HLPYBp3JPZwNnb8c4Wt4bL3XXiUHbMdZdQEIpinhEP_yDPt3dTDUiNmCG2sa8cjLl55gUBUUFndKunqDio3RvZLxRtYnxheBsIYhM0L9DI0bv-frH9_9nr38t2Y8HbKtFF1pvuzEYO_glmO9BGe-Xd7p-HDIEfFqIh2nwaSH4vBBR9u7wBz2KHjYA_wElcAR-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1977747411</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis</title><source>DOAJ, Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PubMed Central (Open Access)</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Xie, Qingsong ; Zhou, Xiaohu ; Huang, Pengfei ; Wei, Jianfeng ; Wang, Weilin ; Zheng, Shusen</creator><creatorcontrib>Xie, Qingsong ; Zhou, Xiaohu ; Huang, Pengfei ; Wei, Jianfeng ; Wang, Weilin ; Zheng, Shusen</creatorcontrib><description>The enhanced liver fibrosis test (ELF) has been shown to accurately predict significant liver fibrosis in several liver diseases.
To perform a meta-analysis to assess the performance of the ELF test for the assessment of liver fibrosis.
Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studies of the ELF test. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, pooled estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) were assessed systematically. The extent of heterogeneity and reasons for it were assessed.
Nine studies were identified for analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, and DOR values of ELF test, for assessment of significant liver fibrosis, were 83% (95% CI=0.80-0.86), 73% (95% CI=0.69-0.77), 4.00 (95% CI=2.50-6.39), 0.24 (95% CI=0.17-0.34), and 16.10 (95% CI=8.27-31.34), respectively; and, for evaluation of severe liver fibrosis, were 78% (95% CI=0.74-0.81), 76% (95% CI=0.73-0.78), 4.39 (95% CI=2.76-6.97), 0.27 (95% CI=0.16-0.46), and 16.01 (95% CI: 7.15-35.82), respectively; and, for estimation of cirrhosis, were 80% (95% CI=0.75-0.85), 71% (95% CI=0.68-0.74), 3.13 (95% CI=2.01-4.87), 0.29 (95% CI=0.19-0.44), and 14.09 (95% CI: 5.43-36.59), respectively.
The ELF test shows good performance and considerable diagnostic value for the prediction of histological fibrosis stage.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092772</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24736610</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Analysis ; Bile ; Biological markers ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Biomarkers ; Biopsy ; Cirrhosis ; Clinical outcomes ; Complications and side effects ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic systems ; Elasticity Imaging Techniques ; Fibrosis ; Hepatitis ; Hepatology ; Heterogeneity ; Histopathology ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Laboratories ; Likelihood ratio ; Liver ; Liver cirrhosis ; Liver Cirrhosis - diagnosis ; Liver Cirrhosis - pathology ; Liver diseases ; Medicine ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Meta-analysis ; Odds Ratio ; Patient outcomes ; Performance assessment ; Physical Sciences ; Public health ; Quality assessment ; Quality control ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Risk factors ; ROC Curve ; Sensitivity ; Sensitivity analysis ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Severity of Illness Index ; Surgery ; Test procedures ; Transplants & implants</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2014-04, Vol.9 (4), p.e92772-e92772</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2014 Xie et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2014 Xie et al 2014 Xie et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-d28680ed0d0bd39195c2e0e1af41466a108803939bf7839c4388996b7cd9f8d33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-d28680ed0d0bd39195c2e0e1af41466a108803939bf7839c4388996b7cd9f8d33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3988013/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3988013/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79342,79343</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24736610$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Xie, Qingsong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Xiaohu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Pengfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wei, Jianfeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Weilin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zheng, Shusen</creatorcontrib><title>The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>The enhanced liver fibrosis test (ELF) has been shown to accurately predict significant liver fibrosis in several liver diseases.
To perform a meta-analysis to assess the performance of the ELF test for the assessment of liver fibrosis.
Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studies of the ELF test. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, pooled estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) were assessed systematically. The extent of heterogeneity and reasons for it were assessed.
Nine studies were identified for analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, and DOR values of ELF test, for assessment of significant liver fibrosis, were 83% (95% CI=0.80-0.86), 73% (95% CI=0.69-0.77), 4.00 (95% CI=2.50-6.39), 0.24 (95% CI=0.17-0.34), and 16.10 (95% CI=8.27-31.34), respectively; and, for evaluation of severe liver fibrosis, were 78% (95% CI=0.74-0.81), 76% (95% CI=0.73-0.78), 4.39 (95% CI=2.76-6.97), 0.27 (95% CI=0.16-0.46), and 16.01 (95% CI: 7.15-35.82), respectively; and, for estimation of cirrhosis, were 80% (95% CI=0.75-0.85), 71% (95% CI=0.68-0.74), 3.13 (95% CI=2.01-4.87), 0.29 (95% CI=0.19-0.44), and 14.09 (95% CI: 5.43-36.59), respectively.
The ELF test shows good performance and considerable diagnostic value for the prediction of histological fibrosis stage.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Bile</subject><subject>Biological markers</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomarkers</subject><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Cirrhosis</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Complications and side effects</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Elasticity Imaging Techniques</subject><subject>Fibrosis</subject><subject>Hepatitis</subject><subject>Hepatology</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Histopathology</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Likelihood ratio</subject><subject>Liver</subject><subject>Liver cirrhosis</subject><subject>Liver Cirrhosis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Liver Cirrhosis - pathology</subject><subject>Liver diseases</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Odds Ratio</subject><subject>Patient outcomes</subject><subject>Performance assessment</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Sensitivity</subject><subject>Sensitivity analysis</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Test procedures</subject><subject>Transplants & implants</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk11r1TAYx4sobk6_gWhBkO2ix7y0TeKFMMamBw4MdHob0iRtc2ibsyQd7tuberpxKruQXjQ8_f3_z0vzJMlbCFYQE_hpa0c3iG61s4NeAcAQIehZcgwZRlmJAH5-cD5KXnm_BaDAtCxfJkcoJ7gsIThO2ptWpzvtaut6MUid2jrVQzsdVdqZO-3S2lTOeuPT08vN1VkatA9pxNMQlT6IxgzNpFrCn1OR9jqITMQa72PgdfKiFp3Xb-b3SfLz6vLm4lu2uf66vjjfZJIUNGQK0ZICrYAClcIMskIiDTQUdQ7zshQQUAoww6yqCcVM5phSxsqKSMVqqjA-Sd7vfXed9XwekueQEUJykkMYifWeUFZs-c6ZXrh7boXhfwPWNVy4YGSnuWCS6ULmrChxDoEUgqFcqarKZSylRNHry5xtrHqtpB6CE93CdPllMC1v7B3HLPYBp3JPZwNnb8c4Wt4bL3XXiUHbMdZdQEIpinhEP_yDPt3dTDUiNmCG2sa8cjLl55gUBUUFndKunqDio3RvZLxRtYnxheBsIYhM0L9DI0bv-frH9_9nr38t2Y8HbKtFF1pvuzEYO_glmO9BGe-Xd7p-HDIEfFqIh2nwaSH4vBBR9u7wBz2KHjYA_wElcAR-</recordid><startdate>20140401</startdate><enddate>20140401</enddate><creator>Xie, Qingsong</creator><creator>Zhou, Xiaohu</creator><creator>Huang, Pengfei</creator><creator>Wei, Jianfeng</creator><creator>Wang, Weilin</creator><creator>Zheng, Shusen</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140401</creationdate><title>The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis</title><author>Xie, Qingsong ; Zhou, Xiaohu ; Huang, Pengfei ; Wei, Jianfeng ; Wang, Weilin ; Zheng, Shusen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-d28680ed0d0bd39195c2e0e1af41466a108803939bf7839c4388996b7cd9f8d33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Bile</topic><topic>Biological markers</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomarkers</topic><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Cirrhosis</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Complications and side effects</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Elasticity Imaging Techniques</topic><topic>Fibrosis</topic><topic>Hepatitis</topic><topic>Hepatology</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Histopathology</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Likelihood ratio</topic><topic>Liver</topic><topic>Liver cirrhosis</topic><topic>Liver Cirrhosis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Liver Cirrhosis - pathology</topic><topic>Liver diseases</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Odds Ratio</topic><topic>Patient outcomes</topic><topic>Performance assessment</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Sensitivity</topic><topic>Sensitivity analysis</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Test procedures</topic><topic>Transplants & implants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Xie, Qingsong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Xiaohu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Pengfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wei, Jianfeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Weilin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zheng, Shusen</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ, Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Xie, Qingsong</au><au>Zhou, Xiaohu</au><au>Huang, Pengfei</au><au>Wei, Jianfeng</au><au>Wang, Weilin</au><au>Zheng, Shusen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2014-04-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>e92772</spage><epage>e92772</epage><pages>e92772-e92772</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>The enhanced liver fibrosis test (ELF) has been shown to accurately predict significant liver fibrosis in several liver diseases.
To perform a meta-analysis to assess the performance of the ELF test for the assessment of liver fibrosis.
Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify studies of the ELF test. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, pooled estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) were assessed systematically. The extent of heterogeneity and reasons for it were assessed.
Nine studies were identified for analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, and DOR values of ELF test, for assessment of significant liver fibrosis, were 83% (95% CI=0.80-0.86), 73% (95% CI=0.69-0.77), 4.00 (95% CI=2.50-6.39), 0.24 (95% CI=0.17-0.34), and 16.10 (95% CI=8.27-31.34), respectively; and, for evaluation of severe liver fibrosis, were 78% (95% CI=0.74-0.81), 76% (95% CI=0.73-0.78), 4.39 (95% CI=2.76-6.97), 0.27 (95% CI=0.16-0.46), and 16.01 (95% CI: 7.15-35.82), respectively; and, for estimation of cirrhosis, were 80% (95% CI=0.75-0.85), 71% (95% CI=0.68-0.74), 3.13 (95% CI=2.01-4.87), 0.29 (95% CI=0.19-0.44), and 14.09 (95% CI: 5.43-36.59), respectively.
The ELF test shows good performance and considerable diagnostic value for the prediction of histological fibrosis stage.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>24736610</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0092772</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2014-04, Vol.9 (4), p.e92772-e92772 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1977747411 |
| source | DOAJ, Directory of Open Access Journals; PubMed Central (Open Access); Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; MEDLINE; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
| subjects | Accuracy Analysis Bile Biological markers Biology and Life Sciences Biomarkers Biopsy Cirrhosis Clinical outcomes Complications and side effects Diagnosis Diagnostic systems Elasticity Imaging Techniques Fibrosis Hepatitis Hepatology Heterogeneity Histopathology Hospitals Humans Laboratories Likelihood ratio Liver Liver cirrhosis Liver Cirrhosis - diagnosis Liver Cirrhosis - pathology Liver diseases Medicine Medicine and Health Sciences Meta-analysis Odds Ratio Patient outcomes Performance assessment Physical Sciences Public health Quality assessment Quality control Reproducibility of Results Research and Analysis Methods Risk factors ROC Curve Sensitivity Sensitivity analysis Sensitivity and Specificity Severity of Illness Index Surgery Test procedures Transplants & implants |
| title | The performance of enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) test for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T14%3A05%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20performance%20of%20enhanced%20liver%20fibrosis%20(ELF)%20test%20for%20the%20staging%20of%20liver%20fibrosis:%20a%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Xie,%20Qingsong&rft.date=2014-04-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=e92772&rft.epage=e92772&rft.pages=e92772-e92772&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0092772&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA375582583%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1977747411&rft_id=info:pmid/24736610&rft_galeid=A375582583&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_a9c9e5c49563410caa924ddbb4c6a162&rfr_iscdi=true |