The NAFLD-MAFLD debate: Eminence vs evidence

Area of Science:

• Hepatology
• Medical Diagnostics
• Scientific Debate

Background:

• Controversial topics in science, like the NAFLD-MAFLD nomenclature debate, necessitate evidence-based resolution.
• Current debates in hepatology regarding fatty liver disease classification highlight the need for objective criteria.
• While debates foster critical thinking, they often identify issues rather than resolve them.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose a method for settling the ongoing debate on fatty liver disease nomenclature and diagnostic criteria.
• To emphasize the mandatory need for evidence-based approaches in scientific controversies.
• To reframe the NAFLD vs. MAFLD debate through the acquisition of empirical evidence.

Main Methods:

• A descriptive review of literature was conducted using PubMed.
• Literature search focused on evidence-based and eminence-based medicine.
• Studies comparing the diagnostic performance of MAFLD and NAFLD criteria were identified.

Main Results:

• Emerging studies comparing NAFLD and MAFLD diagnostic criteria signal a new phase in the debate.
• These studies provide the foundational evidence needed to address the controversy.
• The acquisition of evidence is key to resolving the nomenclature and diagnostic criteria debate.

Conclusions:

• The time is opportune to shift focus from debate to evidence gathering in hepatology.
• Robust evidence, irrespective of the source, should guide scientific consensus and future research.
• Resolving the NAFLD/MAFLD debate through evidence will pave the way for novel research avenues.