Observational studyJAMA2017
Association of US State Implementation of Newborn Screening Policies for Critical Congenital Heart Disease With Early Infant Cardiac Deaths.
Observational study in JAMA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 70 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
70 citing papers in PubMed, 160 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prenatal and Postnatal Screening for Congenital Heart Disease: Prevalence and Detection Patterns From a Retrospective Cohort Study.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026Article
- Burden, trends and economic impact of infant mortality from congenital heart diseases in India, 1990-2021.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Pulse Oximetry Screening in the Newborn: Can Modifications to the Screening Algorithm Improve Detection?International journal of neonatal screening · 2026Review
- Newborn Critical Congenital Heart Disease Screening Using Pulse Oximetry in a Global Context: Progress, Disparities, and the Importance of Early Detection.International journal of neonatal screening · 2026Article
- Pulse Oximetry Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Disease: A Four-Year Experience in Qatar.Cureus · 2026Article
- Peripheral Perfusion Index: Normative Values from Electronically Reported CCHD Screening.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Timing of Critical Congenital Heart Defect Detection: A Multisite Population-Based Study.The Journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Emergency criteria and lifesaving intervention windows for high-risk critical congenital heart disease: a perspectives.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Updated and endorsed newborn screening guidelines in the United States for critical congenital heart disease from the American Academy of Pediatrics.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Nationwide Survey on Neonatal Critical Congenital Cardiopathies in Mexico: Data from 76 Public Health Service Hospital Units.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Article
- Newborn Screening for Congenital Heart Disease: A Five-Year Study in Shanghai.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Article
- Enhancing Newborn Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Disease: Updated Guidelines by AAP.Indian pediatrics · 2025Article
- 2025 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2025Review
- Pulse Oximetry Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Defects: Effectiveness and Implementation across Clinical Settings.Cardiology and cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Why Do We Fail at Reducing Medical Errors? Assuming Responsibility to Leverage Failure into Improvement.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- The Performance of Critical Congenital Heart Disease Screening in Rural Versus Urban Locations in the Northwest United States.Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 2024Article
- Survival of Children With Critical Congenital Heart Defects in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study.Birth defects research · 2024Article
- Addressing Disparities in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease: A Call for Equitable Health Care.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Review
- Machine Learning-Based Critical Congenital Heart Disease Screening Using Dual-Site Pulse Oximetry Measurements.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Cost-utility analysis of prenatal diagnosis of congenital cardiac diseases using deep learning.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
importanceIn 2011, critical congenital heart disease was added to the US Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns, but whether state implementation of screening policies has been associated with infant death rates is unknown.
objectiveTo assess whether there was an association between implementation of state newborn screening policies for critical congenital heart disease and infant death rates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsObservational study with group-level analyses. A difference-in-differences analysis was conducted using the National Center for Health Statistics' period linked birth/infant death data set files for 2007-2013 for 26 546 503 US births through June 30, 2013, aggregated by month and state of birth. EXPOSURES: State policies were classified as mandatory or nonmandatory (including voluntary policies and mandates that were not yet implemented). As of June 1, 2013, 8 states had implemented mandatory screening policies, 5 states had voluntary screening policies, and 9 states had adopted but not yet implemented mandates. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Numbers of early infant deaths (between 24 hours and 6 months of age) coded for critical congenital heart disease or other/unspecified congenital cardiac causes for each state-month birth cohort.
resultsBetween 2007 and 2013, there were 2734 deaths due to critical congenital heart disease and 3967 deaths due to other/unspecified causes. Critical congenital heart disease death rates in states with mandatory screening policies were 8.0 (95% CI, 5.4-10.6) per 100 000 births (n = 37) in 2007 and 6.4 (95% CI, 2.9-9.9) per 100 000 births (n = 13) in 2013 (for births by the end of July); for other/unspecified cardiac causes, death rates were 11.7 (95% CI, 8.6-14.8) per 100 000 births in 2007 (n = 54) and 10.3 (95% CI, 5.9-14.8) per 100 000 births (n = 21) in 2013. Early infant deaths from critical congenital heart disease through December 31, 2013, decreased by 33.4% (95% CI, 10.6%-50.3%), with an absolute decline of 3.9 (95% CI, 3.6-4.1) deaths per 100 000 births after states implemented mandatory screening compared with prior periods and states without screening policies. Early infant deaths from other/unspecified cardiac causes declined by 21.4% (95% CI, 6.9%-33.7%), with an absolute decline of 3.5 (95% CI, 3.2-3.8) deaths per 100 000 births. No significant decrease was associated with nonmandatory screening policies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Statewide implementation of mandatory policies for newborn screening for critical congenital heart disease was associated with a significant decrease in infant cardiac deaths between 2007 and 2013 compared with states without these policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.