A multisociety Delphi consensus statement on new fatty liver disease nomenclature
University of Chicago · The Graduate Center, CUNY · +79 more institutions
Abstract
The principal limitations of the terms NAFLD and NASH are the reliance on exclusionary confounder terms and the use of potentially stigmatising language. This study set out to determine if content experts and patient advocates were in favor of a change in nomenclature and/or definition. A modified Delphi process was led by three large pan-national liver associations. The consensus was defined a priori as a supermajority (67%) vote. An independent committee of experts external to the nomenclature process made the final recommendation on the acronym and its diagnostic criteria. A total of 236 panelists from 56 countries participated in 4 online surveys and 2 hybrid meetings. Response rates across the 4 survey…
Citation impact
- FWCI
- 572.66
- Percentile
- 100%
- References
- 36
Authors
54- MEMary E. Rinella
University of Chicago
- JVJeffrey V. Lazarus
The Graduate Center, CUNY, City University of New York, Barcelona Institute for Global Health, Universitat de Barcelona
- VRVlad Ratziu
Sorbonne Université, Fondation pour l’innovation en Cadiométabolisme et Nutrition
- SFSven Francque
University of Antwerp, Antwerp University Hospital
- AJArun J. Sanyal
Virginia Commonwealth University
Topics & keywords
- Nomenclature
- Statement (logic)
- Medicine
- Internal medicine
- Political science
- Biology
- Taxonomy (biology)
- Zoology
- Reduced inequalities
Funding
- BSBristol-Myers Squibb
- ELEli Lilly and Company
- PPfizer
- AAstraZeneca
- AAAmerican Association for the Study of Liver Diseases
- GSGilead Sciences
- CCelgene
- CBCSL Behring
- NBNGM Biopharmaceuticals
- CBCoherus Biosciences
- EEisai
- NNNovo Nordisk
- APAstellas Pharma
- SShionogi
- EAEuropean Association for the Study of the Liver
- SOSwedish Orphan Biovitrum
- GGenentech
- AAllergan