Quality of Life of Children After Repair of Transposition of the Great Arteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We sought to assess quality of life of children with transposition of the great arteries (TGA) enrolled during transition in management strategy from atrial to arterial switch operation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Neonates enrolled by the Congenital Heart Surgeons Society in a prospective study of TGA between 1985 and 1989 were eligible. A Child Health Questionnaire was sent for completion by the child between February and June 2000. Data were compared with published normative values. Child Health Questionnaires were completed by 306 of 708 survivors at a mean age of 13+/-1 years. Diagnosis included TGA (n=202, 66%), TGA/ventricular septal defect (VSD) (n=84, 27%), and TGA/VSD/pulmonary stenosis (n=20, 7%). Repair type was arterial switch (n=189, 62%), atrial switch (n=105, 34%; Senning=58, Mustard=47), or Rastelli (n=12, 4%). Children with TGA scored significantly higher than published norms in all categories except self-esteem. TGA/VSD/pulmonary stenosis was associated with lower scores than TGA and TGA/VSD in physical functioning (P=0.002), general health perceptions (P=0.012), and mental health (P=0.048). Arterial repair was associated with higher scores than atrial or Rastelli repair in physical functioning (P<0.001), pain (P=0.004), mental health (P=0.019), self-esteem (P=0.004), and general health perceptions (P<0.001). By multivariable analyses, the most common independent factors impacting scores were repair type, perfusion parameters, and gender. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life and health status as perceived by children 11 to 15 years after TGA repair is excellent when compared with published normative data and is better after arterial switch operation than after atrial repair.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".