A dynamic Norwood mortality estimation: Characterizing individual, updated, predicted mortality trajectories after the Norwood operation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Post-Norwood mortality remains high and unpredictable. Current models for mortality do not incorporate interstage events. We sought to determine the association of time-related interstage events, along with (pre)operative characteristics, with death post-Norwood and subsequently predict individual mortality. Methods: From the Congenital Heart Surgeons' Society Critical Left Heart Obstruction cohort, 360 neonates underwent Norwood operations from 2005 to 2016. Risk of death post-Norwood was modeled using a novel application of parametric hazard analysis, in which baseline and operative characteristics and time-related adverse events, procedures, and repeated weight and arterial oxygen saturation measurements were considered. Individual predicted mortality trajectories that dynamically update (increase or decrease) over time were derived and plotted. Results: After the Norwood, 282 patients (78%) progressed to stage 2 palliation, 60 patients (17%) died, 5 patients (1%) underwent heart transplantation, and 13 patients (4%) were alive without transitioning to another end point. In total, 3052 postoperative events occurred and 963 measures of weight and oxygen saturation were obtained. Risk factors for death included resuscitated cardiac arrest, moderate or greater atrioventricular valve regurgitation, intracranial hemorrhage/stroke, sepsis, lower longitudinal oxygen saturation, readmission, smaller baseline aortic diameter, smaller baseline mitral valve z-score, and lower longitudinal weight. Each patient's predicted mortality trajectory varied as risk factors occurred over time. Groups with qualitatively similar mortality trajectories were noted. Conclusions: Risk of death post-Norwood is dynamic and most frequently associated with time-related postoperative events and measures, rather than baseline characteristics. Dynamic predicted mortality trajectories for individuals and their visualization represent a paradigm shift from population-derived insights to precision medicine at the patient level.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".