MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Early Adolescence: The Pediatric Heart Network’s Single Ventricle Reconstruction Trial

2025· article· en· W4412489597 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas A. Miller, Binu Sharma, Russell Gongwer, Felicia Trachtenberg, Jane W. Newburger, Caren S. Goldberg, Kristin Gustafson, J. William Gaynor, Jodie K. Votava‐Smith, Linda M. Lambert, Renée Sananes, Mary C. Kral, Rocky Tsang, Kimberley Heinrich, James Cnota, Amee Shah, Dawn Ilardi

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsHypoplastic left heart syndromeMedicineNorwood procedureNormativePopulationIntelligence quotientPediatricsRandomized controlled trialCognitionHeart diseaseCardiologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neurodevelopmental and functional impairments are among the most consequential morbidities for survivors of hypoplastic left heart syndrome after staged single ventricle surgical palliation. The SVRIII trial (Long-Term Outcomes of Children With Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome and the Impact of Norwood Shunt Type) enrolled adolescents, who were randomized to different surgical shunt types at the time of Norwood procedure as neonates, for multifaceted in-person evaluation. This study reports their neurodevelopmental outcomes. METHODS: Transplant-free survivors from SVRIII were invited to complete an in-person comprehensive neurodevelopmental evaluation in early adolescence. Outcomes across domains of cognition, academics, learning, memory, and attention, as well as social, emotional, behavioral, adaptive, and executive function, were compared with those of normative populations. Associations with demographic and medical covariates, including Norwood shunt type, were also assessed. RESULTS: Among 549 participants enrolled in the SVR trial (Single Ventricle Reconstruction), 200 of the 237 SVRIII participants (84%) completed a neurodevelopmental evaluation at a mean age of 11 years (range, 10 to 14 years). SVRIII participants who did versus did not undergo evaluation were more likely to be male (63% versus 51%), to be White (87% versus 76%), and to have a higher Childhood Opportunity Index score (61±26 versus 46±39). Full-scale intelligence quotient (88±18) was significantly lower than in the normative population, with 39% >1 and 15% >2 SD below the normative mean. Similar patterns were seen for reading (38% >1 SD and 16% >2 SD below the normative mean) and math (38% >1 SD and 19% >2 SD below the normative mean) scores. Attention, executive functioning, social development, visual memory, and adaptive functioning were all more impaired than in the normative population. Measures of socioeconomic status, number of medical complications, and requirement for a gastrostomy tube were each independent predictors of neurodevelopment, with socioeconomic status the most consistently significant factor across models. Group differences by shunt type were inconsistent across neurodevelopmental domains without a clear benefit of one surgical strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In early adolescence, transplant-free survivors of surgical palliation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome show concerning impairments across all domains of neurodevelopment. The distribution of affected outcomes is broad and associated with demographic, medical, and, most frequently, socioeconomic factors. Our findings support recommendations for neurodevelopmental evaluation during adolescence to guide individualized interventions to promote educational success and psychosocial well-being. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02455531.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.273
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→