Patient-reported quality of life outcomes for children with serious congenital heart defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported, health-related quality of life (QoL) for children with serious congenital heart defects (CHDs) and unaffected classmates and to investigate the demographic and clinical factors influencing QoL. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: UK National Health Service. PATIENTS: UK-wide cohort of children with serious CHDs aged 10-14 years requiring cardiac intervention in the first year of life in one of 17 UK paediatric cardiac surgical centres operating during 1992-1995. A comparison group of classmates of similar age and sex was recruited. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Child self-report of health-related QoL scores (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, PedsQL) and parental report of schooling and social activities. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 477 children with CHDs (56% boys; mean age 12.1 (SD 1.0) years) and 464 classmates (55%; 12.0 (SD 1.1) years). Children with CHDs rated QoL significantly lower than classmates (CHDs: median 78.3 (IQR 65.0-88.6); classmates: 88.0 (80.2-94.6)) and scored lower on physical (CHDs: 84.4; classmates: 93.8; difference 9.4 (7.8 to 10.9)) and psychosocial functioning subscales (CHDs: 76.7, classmates: 85.0; difference 8.3 (6.0 to 10.6)). Cardiac interventions, school absence, regular medications and non-cardiac comorbidities were independently associated with reduced QoL. Participation in sport positively influenced QoL and was associated with higher psychosocial functioning scores. CONCLUSIONS: Children with serious CHDs experience lower QoL than unaffected classmates. This appears related to the burden of clinical intervention rather than underlying cardiac diagnosis. Participation in sports activities is positively associated with increased emotional well-being. Child self-report measures of QoL would be a valuable addition to clinical outcome audit in this age group.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".