MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176862621 · doi:10.1186/s12888-021-03324-w

ADHD symptomatology of children with congenital heart disease 10 years after cardiac surgery: the role of age at operation

2021· article· en· W3176862621 on OpenAlexaff
Nikoletta Ráhel Czobor, Zsófia Ocsovszky, György Róth, Szabolcs Takács, Márta Csabai, Edgár Székely, János Gál, Andrea Székely, Barna Konkolÿ Thege

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychiatry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsWaypoint Centre for Mental Health CareUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCBCLChild Behavior ChecklistHeart diseaseCardiac surgeryPediatricsDiseaseChecklistRating scaleSurgeryPsychiatryInternal medicinePsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences in ADHD symptomatology between healthy controls and children who underwent cardiac surgery at different ages. METHODS: Altogether, 133 children (54 patients with congenital heart disease undergoing first cardiac surgery under 3 years of age, 26 operated at the age of 3 or later, and 53 healthy controls) were examined. Patients completed the Youth Self Report (YSR), while their parents completed the Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL) and the ADHD Rating Scale-IV. RESULTS: Children receiving surgery for the first time under the age of 3 years were more likely diagnosed with cyanotic type malformation and have undergone to a greater number of operations. However, ADHD symptoms of those treated surgically at or above 3 years of age were more severe than that of the control group or those who were treated surgically at a younger age. The control group and those treated surgically below the age of three did not differ across any of the ADHD symptom severity indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The age at the time of cardiac surgery might be associated with later ADHD symptom severity - with lower age at operation associated with better outcomes. Further, adequately powered studies are needed to confirm these exploratory findings and investigate the moderators of this relationship.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychiatrySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207