MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986379311 · doi:10.1542/peds.108.6.1325

Functional Limitations in Young Children With Congenital Heart Defects After Cardiac Surgery

2001· article· en· W1986379311 on OpenAlexafffund
Catherine Limperopoulos, Annette Majnemer, Michael Shevell, Bernard Rosenblatt, Charles Rohlicek, Christo I. Tchervenkov, Husam Darwish

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsMedicineVineland Adaptive Behavior ScaleActivities of daily livingPediatricsFunctional Independence MeasurePhysical therapyPerioperativeCohortCognitionSurgeryPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: With the recent dramatic decline in mortality rates of infants undergoing open-heart surgery (OHS), there is growing concern regarding neurodevelopmental sequelae. Outcome studies have primarily focused on delineating developmental impairments; however, the impact on function and family burden has not been investigated. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of functional limitations and burden of care of young children with congenital heart defects (CHD) after OHS. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred thirty-one eligible infants with CHD undergoing their first OHS were recruited prospectively. Patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively, and again 12 to 18 months after surgery. Functional assessments included the WeeFIM (Functional Independence Measure) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale. RESULTS: For the WeeFIM, mean quotients were 84.3 +/- 23.8 (self-care), 77.2 +/- 30.0 (mobility), and 92.4 +/- 27.8 (cognition), with an overall quotient of 83.8 +/- 23.4. Only 21% of the cohort was functioning within their expected age range. Moderate disability was noted in 37%, while only 6% demonstrated a severe disability. For the Vineland scale, mean score for daily living skills was 84.4 +/- 17.6, and 80.3 +/- 15.9 for socialization. Functional difficulties in daily living skills were documented in 40%, whereas >1/2 had poor socialization skills. Factors enhancing risk for functional disabilities included perioperative neurodevelopmental status, microcephaly, length of deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, length of stay in the intensive care unit, age at surgery, and maternal education. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of functional limitations and dependence in activities of daily living is currently underappreciated in the clinical setting, and deserves additional attention by pediatricians and developmental specialists.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations176
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207