MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415592264 · doi:10.1016/j.jocd.2025.101636

Bone density, structure, and estimated strength in children with congenital heart disease. A CHAMPS* cohort study

2025· article· en· W4415592264 on OpenAlexafffund
Marta Erlandson, Matthew S. Chapelski, Chantelle L. Baril, Charissa Pockett, Scott Pharis, Kristi D. Wright, Corey R. Tomczak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Densitometry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSaskatchewan Health Research FoundationChildren's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsCohort studyCohortTibiaHeart diseaseProspective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Children with congenital heart disease (CHD) have lower levels of physical activity, lower birth weights, and lower nutrient intake compared to their typically developing peers (TDP); which can put children with CHD at increased risk of impaired skeletal development. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the bone architecture of children with CHD compared to TDP. Our secondary objective was to evaluate differences between CHD lesion complexity. METHODS: Forty-two children with CHD 7 to 15 years of age (10.9±2.5) were age and sex-matched to 41 TDP. Peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) scans were obtained at the distal (4%) and shaft (65%, 66%) sites for the radius and tibia, respectively. pQCT bone parameters were compared between groups using multiple analysis of covariance (MANCOVA), using sex, age, height, weight, maturity, and physical activity as covariates. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between children with CHD and TDP at the distal radius or distal tibia (p>0.05). Children with CHD had significantly lower total area, cortical content, cortical area, cortical thickness, and polar stress-strain index at the radial and tibial shaft compared to TDP (p<0.05). When sub-dividing children with CHD by lesion severity, the complex CHD group had significantly lower cortical content, cortical area, cortical thickness, and polar stress-strain index at the radius and tibia shaft when compared to TDP (p<0.05). Additionally, children with complex lesions had greater cortical density at the radius and tibia shaft when compared to TDP (p<0.05). Finally, children with simple lesions had greater cortical density at the radius shaft when compared to TDP (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Children with complex CHD had worse bone parameters when compared to TDP. Children with complex CHD lesions may be at increased risk of impaired bone density, structure, and estimated strength at both the radius and tibia shaft.

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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.353 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical DensitometrySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207