This retrospective study examines the potential of FINDRISC to predict liver fibrosis in non-diabetic individuals, indicating its dual use for screening.
Background FINDRISC is a non-invasive, easy-to-use, and free screening tool developed to estimate the 10-year risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Objective This study aimed to investigate whether FINDRISC can also predict liver fibrosis risk, as measured by the fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) in individuals without a diagnosis of T2DM. Methods This retrospective cross-sectional study included 1329 adults aged ≥18 years without prior T2DM, based on records from a Family Health Center in Turkey. The FINDRISC results used in T2DM screening were analyzed retrospectively from patient records. FINDRISC scores were calculated from questionnaire results, and FIB-4 was derived from laboratory data (age, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, platelet count). Chi-square, correlation, and regression analyses were performed, adjusting for gender, smoking, alcohol use, physical activity, and marital status. Results Mean FINDRISC scores and FIB-4 were 11.88 ± 6.22 and 1.01 ± 0.80, respectively. Higher FINDRISC categories were associated with older age, female sex, non-smoking, physical inactivity, and obesity. A moderate positive correlation was observed between FINDRISC and FIB-4 (rho = 0.427, P < 0.001). In multivariable regression, FINDRISC emerged as an independent predictor of FIB-4 (β = 0.250, P < 0.001), increasing model variance explained from 6.4% to 12.3%. Conclusion FINDRISC, beyond its established role in T2DM risk stratification, may serve as a dual, non-invasive, and free screening tool to identify individuals at increased risk of liver fibrosis. Thanks to its simplicity and self-administered nature, individuals can easily complete the questionnaire at home, enabling early diagnosis of both T2DM and liver fibrosis risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yildiz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: