Healthcare transition for youth with heart disease: a clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Adolescents with heart disease have complex health needs and require lifelong cardiology follow-up. Interventions to facilitate paediatric to adult healthcare transition are recommended, although outcomes are unknown. We sought to determine the impact of a transition intervention on improving knowledge and self-management skills among this population. METHODS: We conducted a clinical trial of 15-17 year olds with moderate or complex congenital heart disease (CHD) or cardiomyopathy. Participants were systematically allocated to either usual care (controls) or a 1 h nurse-led one-on-one teaching session about their heart. Allocation was determined by week of attendance in the cardiology clinic. The primary outcome was change in Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire (TRAQ) score at 6 months, possible scores ranging from 1 (low) to 5 (optimal). Cardiac knowledge (MyHeart score, range 0-100) was a secondary outcome. Analysis was intention to treat. RESULTS: Of 58 participants (48% female), 52 had CHD and 6 had cardiomyopathy. 27 were allocated to the intervention group; 3 declined the intervention and received usual care. When comparing the intervention group with the usual care group at 6 months postintervention, the mean self-management TRAQ score was 3.59 (±0.83) vs. 3.16 (±1.05), respectively (p=0.048, adjusted for baseline score); the mean self-advocacy TRAQ score was 4.38 (±0.56) vs. 4.01 (±0.95) (p=0.18) and the mean MyHeart score was 75% (±15) vs. 61% (±25) (p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: A 1 h nurse-led transition intervention resulted in a significant improvement in self-management and cardiac knowledge scores. An educational intervention should be routine for youth with congenital or acquired heart disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01286480.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".