The percentages for steatosis, inflammation, and ballooning in Table 1 sum to over 100% for each category (e.g., steatosis: 23% + 39% + 38% = 100%, which is correct, but inflammation: 34% + 27% + 39% = 100%, ballooning: 34% + 27% + 39% = 100%). While these add up, the table layout is confusing. The categories are not mutually exclusive in the way presented; it would be clearer to present them as separate rows. This is a minor presentation issue but needs clarification. More importantly, the numbers for steatosis, inflammation, and ballooning are identical (e.g., 23%, 39%, 38% for steatosis; 34%, 27%, 39% for inflammation and ballooning). This seems highly unlikely and suggests a data entry or formatting error. Did the authors accidentally copy the same distribution for all three histological features?
The authors used Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient to assess the correlation between CPA and fibrosis stage. Spearman’s correlation assesses monotonic relationships, but the authors note the correlation is “nonlinear”. Why was a non-linear correlation coefficient (e.g., Somers’ D or a generalized correlation) not used? This is important because the strength of association might be misrepresented if the relationship is not monotonic.