Validating new coding algorithms to improve identification of alcohol-associated and nonalcohol-associated cirrhosis hospitalizations in administrative databases.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol (AC) and nonalcohol-associated cirrhosis (NAC) epidemiology studies are limited by available case definitions. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of previous and newly developed case definitions to identify AC and NAC hospitalizations. METHODS: We randomly selected 700 hospitalizations from the 2008 to 2022 Canadian Discharge Abstract Database with alcohol-associated and cirrhosis-related International Classification of Diseases 10th revision codes. We compared standard approaches for AC (ie, AC code alone and alcohol use disorder and nonspecific cirrhosis codes together) and NAC (ie, NAC codes alone) case identification to newly developed approaches that combine standard approaches with new code combinations. Using electronic medical record review as the reference standard, we calculated case definition positive and negative predictive values, sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC. RESULTS: Electronic medical records were available for 671 admissions; 252 had confirmed AC and 195 NAC. Compared to previous AC definitions, the newly developed algorithm selecting for the AC code, alcohol-associated hepatic failure code, or alcohol use disorder code with a decompensated cirrhosis-related condition or NAC code provided the best overall positive predictive value (91%, 95% CI: 87-95), negative predictive value (89%, CI: 86-92), sensitivity (81%, CI: 76-86), specificity (96%, CI: 93-97), and AUROC (0.88, CI: 0.85-0.91). Comparing all evaluated NAC definitions, high sensitivity (92%, CI: 87-95), specificity (82%, CI: 79-86), negative predictive value (96%, CI: 94-98), AUROC (0.87, CI: 0.84-0.90), but relatively low positive predictive value (68%, CI: 62-74) were obtained by excluding alcohol use disorder codes and using either a NAC code in any diagnostic position or a primary diagnostic code for HCC, unspecified/chronic hepatic failure, esophageal varices without bleeding, or hepatorenal syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: New case definitions show enhanced accuracy for identifying hospitalizations for AC and NAC compared to previously used approaches.

A scoping review of the globally available tools for assessing health research partnership outcomes and impacts.

BACKGROUND: Health research partnership approaches have grown in popularity over the past decade, but the systematic evaluation of their outcomes and impacts has not kept equal pace. Identifying partnership assessment tools and key partnership characteristics is needed to advance partnerships, partnership measurement, and the assessment of their outcomes and impacts through systematic study. OBJECTIVE: To locate and identify globally available tools for assessing the outcomes and impacts of health research partnerships. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL + , PsychINFO) with an a priori strategy from inception to June 2021, without limits. We screened studies independently and in duplicate, keeping only those involving a health research partnership and the development, use and/or assessment of tools to evaluate partnership outcomes and impacts. Reviewer disagreements were resolved by consensus. Study, tool and partnership characteristics, and emerging research questions, gaps and key recommendations were synthesized using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: We screened 36 027 de-duplicated citations, reviewed 2784 papers in full text, and kept 166 studies and three companion reports. Most studies originated in North America and were published in English after 2015. Most of the 205 tools we identified were questionnaires and surveys targeting researchers, patients and public/community members. While tools were comprehensive and usable, most were designed for single use and lacked validity or reliability evidence. Challenges associated with the interchange and definition of terms (i.e., outcomes, impacts, tool type) were common and may obscure partnership measurement and comparison. Very few of the tools identified in this study overlapped with tools identified by other, similar reviews. Partnership tool development, refinement and evaluation, including tool measurement and optimization, are key areas for future tools-related research. CONCLUSION: This large scoping review identified numerous, single-use tools that require further development and testing to improve their psychometric and scientific qualities. The review also confirmed that the health partnership research domain and its measurement tools are still nascent and actively evolving. Dedicated efforts and resources are required to better understand health research partnerships, partnership optimization and partnership measurement and evaluation using valid, reliable and practical tools that meet partners' needs.

Acute severe hepatitis as a presenting symptom in clinically stable patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection.

BACKGROUND: Suggested mechanisms for SARS-CoV-2 direct liver infection have been proposed by others to involve both cholangiocytes and hepatocytes. Early clinical studies have highlighted abnormal liver biochemistry with COVID-19 infection as often not being severe, with elevated liver enzymes <5X the upper limit of normal. METHODS: Liver enzymes were evaluated and compared in patients admitted with a diagnosis of COVID-19 in a deidentified Internal Medicine-Medical Teaching Unit/hospitalist admission laboratory database. Comparisons in the incidence of severe liver injury (alanine aminotransferase >10 times upper limit of normal) were made for patients with pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 (November 30, 2019, to December 15, 2021) and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 (December 15, 2021, to April 15, 2022). Comprehensive hospital health records were also reviewed for the 2 patient cases discussed. One patient had a liver biopsy that was evaluated with H&E and immunohistochemistry staining using an antibody against COVID-19 spike protein. RESULTS: The evaluation of a deidentified admissions laboratory database found the incidence of severe liver injury was 0.42% with Omicron versus 0.30% with pre-Omicron variants of COVID-19. In both patient cases discussed, abnormal liver biochemistry and a negative comprehensive workup strongly suggest COVID-19 as the cause of severe liver injury. In the one patient with liver biopsy, immunohistochemistry staining suggests SARS-CoV-2 presence in the portal and lobular spaces in association with immune cell infiltration. CONCLUSIONS: The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 should be considered in the differential diagnosis of severe acute liver injury. Our observation suggests that this new variant, either through direct liver infection and/or mediating immune dysfunction, can result in severe liver injury.

How are health research partnerships assessed? A systematic review of outcomes, impacts, terminology and the use of theories, models and frameworks.

BACKGROUND: Accurate, consistent assessment of outcomes and impacts is challenging in the health research partnerships domain. Increased focus on tool quality, including conceptual, psychometric and pragmatic characteristics, could improve the quantification, measurement and reporting partnership outcomes and impacts. This cascading review was undertaken as part of a coordinated, multicentre effort to identify, synthesize and assess a vast body of health research partnership literature. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the outcomes and impacts of health research partnerships, relevant terminology and the type/use of theories, models and frameworks (TMF) arising from studies using partnership assessment tools with known conceptual, psychometric and pragmatic characteristics. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus and PsycINFO) from inception to 2 June 2021. We retained studies containing partnership evaluation tools with (1) conceptual foundations (reference to TMF), (2) empirical, quantitative psychometric evidence (evidence of validity and reliability, at minimum) and (3) one or more pragmatic characteristics. Outcomes, impacts, terminology, definitions and TMF type/use were abstracted verbatim from eligible studies using a hybrid (independent abstraction-validation) approach and synthesized using summary statistics (quantitative), inductive thematic analysis and deductive categories (qualitative). Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD). RESULTS: Application of inclusion criteria yielded 37 eligible studies. Study quality scores were high (mean 80%, standard deviation 0.11%) but revealed needed improvements (i.e. methodological, reporting, user involvement in research design). Only 14 (38%) studies reported 48 partnership outcomes and 55 impacts; most were positive effects (43, 90% and 47, 89%, respectively). Most outcomes were positive personal, functional, structural and contextual effects; most impacts were personal, functional and contextual in nature. Most terms described outcomes (39, 89%), and 30 of 44 outcomes/impacts terms were unique, but few were explicitly defined (9, 20%). Terms were complex and mixed on one or more dimensions (e.g. type, temporality, stage, perspective). Most studies made explicit use of study-related TMF (34, 92%). There were 138 unique TMF sources, and these informed tool construct type/choice and hypothesis testing in almost all cases (36, 97%). CONCLUSION: This study synthesized partnership outcomes and impacts, deconstructed term complexities and evolved our understanding of TMF use in tool development, testing and refinement studies. Renewed attention to basic concepts is necessary to advance partnership measurement and research innovation in the field. Systematic review protocol registration: PROSPERO protocol registration: CRD42021137932 https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=137932 .

ADAM Metalloproteinase Domain 17 Regulates Cholestasis-Associated Liver Injury and Sickness Behavior Development in Mice.

Disintegrin and metalloproteinase domain-containing protein 17 (ADAM17) is a ubiquitously expressed membrane-bound enzyme that mediates shedding of a wide variety of important regulators in inflammation including cytokines and adhesion molecules. Hepatic expression of numerous cytokines and adhesion molecules are increased in cholestatic liver diseases including primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), however, the pathophysiological role of ADAM17 in regulating these conditions remains unknown. Therefore, we evaluated the role of ADAM17 in a mouse model of cholestatic liver injury due to bile duct ligation (BDL). We found that BDL enhanced hepatic ADAM17 protein expression, paralleled by increased ADAM17 bioactivity. Moreover, inhibition of ADAM17 bioactivity with the specific inhibitor DPC 333 significantly improved both biochemical and histological evidence of liver damage in BDL mice. Patients with cholestatic liver disease commonly experience adverse behavioral symptoms, termed sickness behaviors. Similarly, BDL in mice induces reproducible sickness behavior development, driven by the upregulated expression of cytokines and adhesion molecules that are in turn regulated by ADAM17 activity. Indeed, inhibition of ADAM17 activity significantly ameliorated BDL-associated sickness behavior development. In translational studies, we evaluated changes in ADAM17 protein expression in liver biopsies obtained from patients with PBC and PSC, compared to normal control livers. PSC and PBC patients demonstrated increased hepatic ADAM17 expression in hepatocytes, cholangiocytes and in association with liver-infiltrating immune cells compared to normal controls. In summary, cholestatic liver injury in mice and humans is associated with increased hepatic ADAM17 expression. Furthermore, inhibition of ADAM17 activity improves both cholestatic liver injury and associated sickness behavior development, suggesting that ADAM17 inhibition may represent a novel therapeutic approach for treating patients with PBC/PSC.