MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978209405 · doi:10.1002/uog.21328

EP11.07: Echocardiographic diagnosis of congenital heart disease (CHD): diagnostic limitations, risk factors and impact of errors

2019· article· en· W2978209405 on OpenAlexaff
B. Chen, H J Scott, Varsha Thakur, Shi‐Joon Yoo, Fraser Golding, Cedric Manlhiot, Edgar Jaeggi

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetal echocardiographyHeart diseasePrenatal diagnosisGreat arteriesMedical diagnosisCardiac surgeryFetusPediatricsHypoplastic left heart syndromeDiseasePregnancyObstetricsCardiologySurgeryInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate prenatal detection of CHD is critical to counseling on parental options and anticipated outcomes. We sought to analyse the discordances between expert fetal (F) cardiac diagnosis and postnatal (PN) findings and the impact on management and outcomes. We included 1,011 live-births with echocardiographic CHD diagnoses before/after birth at our tertiary care centre from 2008-2017. Excluded were cases with minor or reversible cardiac disease. The last prenatal echocardiographic findings were compared with the PN diagnoses. Discordant F and PN echocardiograms were independently reviewed and inconsistencies classified based on clinical relevance, preventability, and contributing factors. The RACHS score was used to categorise surgical complexity. 102 live-births (10%) with overall 116 discordant diagnoses were identified. This included 19 fetuses (1.9%) with expected aortic coarctation that had no CHD after birth (false-positive). Thirteen (1.3%) had prenatally missed CHD (false-negatives: 17 diagnoses), including 5 cases with duct-dependent critical lesions. In 70 cases, cardiac lesions were added (n = 45), removed (n = 11), or changed (n = 25) after birth, with aortic arch obstruction (13/209), situs abnormalities (7/48), and total anomalous pulmonary venous drainage (10/42) as the most commonly added conditions. In 32 neonates (3.2%), the change in PN diagnosis had a negative impact on the planned treatment, leading to additional, more complex surgery. A positive impact was found in 31 cases (3.1%), requiring no or less surgery than prenatally predicted. Discordances were predominantly associated with complex or unusual forms of CHD (60/102), suboptimal F imaging, and aortic arch obstruction. Modification of fetal CHD diagnosis after birth is not uncommon and led to significant changes in postnatal care in 6.3% of our patients. Clinicians should be aware of the inherent limitations of prenatal echocardiography, including in accurately predicting the postnatal treatment and outcomes. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207