Relationship of Patient and Medical Characteristics to Health Status in Children and Adolescents After the Fontan Procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After the Fontan procedure, patients are at risk for suboptimal health status related to their complex healthcare experience, physiological limitations, medical complications, and guarded long-term prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the Pediatric Heart Network cross-sectional study of Fontan survivors 6 to 18 years of age, parents completed the Child Health Questionnaire, and scores were related in multivariable analysis to patient and medical characteristics obtained from medical record review. For 537 patients (mean age at study, 11.9 years; 60% male) with a median age at Fontan of 2.8 years (range, 0.7 to 14.6 years), parent-reported patient morbidities included deficits in vision in 33%, speech in 27%, and hearing in 7%, as well as problems with attention in 46%, learning in 43%, development in 24%, behavior in 23%, anxiety in 17%, and depression in 8%. Child Health Questionnaire summary scores were significantly lower than the US population sample for Physical Functioning (mean Z score, -0.47+/-1.19; P<0.001) and Psychosocial Functioning (-0.28+/-1.08; P<0.001). Parent-reported medical conditions and long-term and current medical problems explained the greatest amount of variation in the Physical Functioning scores. Parent-reported patient conditions, including behavior, learning, anxiety, and attention problems and depression, explained the greatest amount of variation in the Psychosocial Functioning scores. Lower family income had a negative impact on both Physical and Psychosocial Functioning. CONCLUSIONS: There are deficits in health status in children and adolescents after the Fontan procedure. Strategies to address this problem might emphasize coordinated and effective prevention, detection, and management of noncardiac and psychosocial conditions, as well as specific targeting of patients from low-income households.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".