Header Logo

Connection

AARON THRIFT to Risk Assessment

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications AARON THRIFT has written about Risk Assessment.
AARON THRIFT
Connection Strength
1.784
Risk Assessment
  1. PNPLA3, Obesity, and Heavy Alcohol Use in Cirrhosis Patients May Exert a Synergistic Increase Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024 Sep; 22(9):1858-1866.e4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.112
  2. An Electronic Health Record Model for Predicting Risk of Hepatic Fibrosis in Primary Care Patients. Dig Dis Sci. 2024 Jul; 69(7):2430-2436.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.112
  3. Risk stratification for hepatocellular cancer among patients with cirrhosis using a hepatic fat polygenic risk score. PLoS One. 2023; 18(2):e0282309.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.103
  4. Polygenic Risk Scores for Follow Up After Colonoscopy and Polypectomy: Another Tool for Risk Stratification and Planning Surveillance? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 01; 21(1):29-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.099
  5. Comparative performance of risk prediction models for hepatitis B-related hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States. J Hepatol. 2022 02; 76(2):294-301.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.093
  6. Global burden and epidemiology of Barrett oesophagus and oesophageal cancer. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 06; 18(6):432-443.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  7. Dietary Factors and Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Risk Among US Veterans. Dig Dis Sci. 2021 05; 66(5):1600-1610.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.085
  8. Use of Acid-Suppressant Medications After Diagnosis Increases Mortality in a Subset of Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients. Dig Dis Sci. 2020 09; 65(9):2691-2699.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.082
  9. Risk and Predictors of Esophageal and Stomach Cancers in HIV-Infected Veterans: A Matched Cohort Study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2019 07 01; 81(3):e65-e72.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.080
  10. No Association Between Vitamin D Status and Risk of Barrett's Esophagus or Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Mendelian Randomization Study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 10; 17(11):2227-2235.e1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.078
  11. Interactions Between Genetic Variants and Environmental Factors Affect Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Barrett's Esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 10; 16(10):1598-1606.e4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.073
  12. Determining Risk of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Based on Epidemiologic Factors and Genetic?Variants. Gastroenterology. 2018 04; 154(5):1273-1281.e3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.072
  13. Obesity and Risk of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Comparison of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis and Conventionally-Derived Anthropometric Measures. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 12; 15(12):1965-1967.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.070
  14. Inverse Association Between Gluteofemoral Obesity and Risk of?Barrett's Esophagus in a Pooled Analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 10; 14(10):1412-1419.e3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.065
  15. Coffee or Tea, Hot or Cold, Are Not Associated With Risk of Barrett's Esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 May; 14(5):769-72.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.063
  16. Obesity and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and Barrett's esophagus: a Mendelian randomization study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Nov; 106(11).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.058
  17. Fat mass by bioelectrical impedance analysis is not associated with increased risk of Barrett esophagus. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2014 Mar; 48(3):218-23.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  18. A multibiomarker risk score helps predict risk for Barrett's esophagus. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Aug; 12(8):1267-71.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  19. Can we really predict risk of cancer? Cancer Epidemiol. 2013 Aug; 37(4):349-52.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.052
  20. A model to determine absolute risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 Feb; 11(2):138-44.e2.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.050
  21. Comparing the performance of 3 sarcopenia definitions for predicting adverse events prior to liver transplant. Hepatol Commun. 2025 Jun 01; 9(6).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  22. A Simple, Interpretable Machine Learning Model Based on Clinical Factors Accurately Predicts Incident Dysplasia or Malignancy in Barrett's Esophagus. Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Aug; 70(8):2739-2749.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  23. Risk Stratification Model for Hepatocellular Cancer in Patients With Cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 12; 21(13):3296-3304.e3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  24. Sex-Specific Genetic Associations for Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2020 12; 159(6):2065-2076.e1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  25. Risk Prediction Models for Barrett's Esophagus Discriminate Well and Are Generalizable in an External Validation Study. Dig Dis Sci. 2020 10; 65(10):2992-2999.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  26. Shared Genetic Etiology of Obesity-Related Traits and Barrett's Esophagus/Adenocarcinoma: Insights from Genome-Wide Association Studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 02; 29(2):427-433.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  27. Information on Genetic Variants Does Not Increase Identification of Individuals at Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Compared to Clinical Risk Factors. Gastroenterology. 2019 01; 156(1):43-45.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  28. Development of Evidence-Based Surveillance Intervals After Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2018 08; 155(2):316-326.e6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  29. Model for Identifying Individuals at Risk for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 08; 16(8):1229-1236.e4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  30. The Annual Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Does Not Decrease Over Time in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jul; 112(7):1049-1055.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  31. A Model to Predict the Risk of Keratinocyte Carcinomas. J Invest Dermatol. 2016 06; 136(6):1247-1254.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.