Infective Endocarditis in Children With Congenital Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association guidelines for prevention of infective endocarditis (IE) in 2007 reduced the groups of congenital heart disease (CHD) patients for whom antibiotic prophylaxis was indicated. The evidence base in CHD patients is limited. We sought to determine the risk of IE in children with CHD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a population-based analysis to determine the cumulative incidence and predictors of IE in children (0-18 years) with CHD by the use of the Quebec CHD Database from 1988 to 2010. In 47 518 children with CHD followed for 458 109 patient-years, 185 cases of IE were observed. Cumulative incidence of IE was estimated in the subset of 34 279 children with CHD followed since birth, in whom the risk of IE up to 18 years of age was 6.1/1000 children (95% confidence interval, 5.0-7.5). In a nested case-control analysis, the following CHD lesions were at highest risk of IE in comparison with atrial septal defects (adjusted rate ratio, 95% confidence interval): cyanotic CHD (6.44, 3.95-10.50), endocardial cushion defects (5.47, 2.89-10.36), and left-sided lesions (1.88, 1.01-3.49). Cardiac surgery within 6 months (5.34, 2.49-11.43) and an age of <3 years (3.53, 2.51-4.96; reference, ages 6-18) also conferred an elevated risk of IE. CONCLUSIONS: In a large population-based cohort of children with CHD, we documented the cumulative incidence of IE and associated factors. These findings help identify groups of patients who are at the highest risk of developing IE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".