Development and Validation of a Mortality Risk Score for Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Robust risk assessment is crucial for the growing repaired tetralogy of Fallot population at risk of major adverse clinical outcomes; however, current tools are hindered by lack of validation. This study aims to develop and validate a risk prediction model for death in the repaired tetralogy of Fallot population. Methods and Results Patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot enrolled in the INDICATOR (International Multicenter Tetralogy of Fallot Registry) cohort with clinical, arrhythmia, cardiac magnetic resonance, and outcome data were included. Patients from London, Amsterdam, and Boston sites were placed in the development cohort; patients from the Toronto site were used for external validation. Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate factors associated with time from cardiac magnetic resonance until the primary outcome: all‐cause death. Of 1552 eligible patients (n=1221 in development, n=331 in validation; median age at cardiac magnetic resonance 23.4 [interquartile range, 15.6–35.6] years; median follow up 9.5 years), 102 (6.6%) experienced the primary outcome. The multivariable Cox model performed similarly during development (concordance index, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.78–0.88]) and external validation (concordance index, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.71–0.90]) and identified older age at cardiac magnetic resonance, obesity, type of tetralogy of Fallot repair, higher right ventricular end‐systolic volume index, and lower biventricular global function index as independent predictors of death. A risk‐scoring algorithm dividing patients into low‐risk (score ≤4) versus high‐risk (score >4) groups was validated to effectively discriminate risk of death (15‐year survival of 95% versus 74%, respectively; P <0.001). Conclusions This externally validated mortality risk prediction algorithm can help identify vulnerable patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot who may benefit from targeted interventions.
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 | 0.012 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".