ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Delayed diagnosis of critical congenital heart defects predicting risk factors and survival rate in newborns in Beijing: a retrospective study.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expert collaboration for safe perinatal stabilization of neonates with select critical congenital heart defects at non-cardiac centers.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Delayed diagnosis of congenital heart diseases and associated factors in the largest tertiary hospital in Ethiopia.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Article
- Neonatal Outcomes of Critical Congenital Heart Defects: A Multicenter Epidemiological Study of Turkish Neonatal Society : Neonatal Outcomes of CCHD.Pediatric cardiology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of critical congenital heart disease from 2018 to 2020 in Turkey: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- The implications of an integrated management model of prenatal diagnosis/postnatal treatment for premature infants with critical congenital heart disease-a case-control study.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2022Article
- Prediction of congenital heart disease for newborns: comparative analysis of Holt-Winters exponential smoothing and autoregressive integrated moving average models.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Prognosis of Congenital Anomalies in Conceptions FollowingFrontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the prevalence and survival rate of newborns with a delayed diagnosis of critical congenital heart defects (CCHD) in Beijing.
methodsThis retrospective study analysed data from births between 2010 and 2017 from the Birth Defects Monitoring Network in Beijing. Newborns with CCHD were analysed according to seven categories. Statistical analyses were used to calculate the mortality rate within the first week (days 0-6) after live birth. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of survival was performed to analyse the potential risk factors for newborn mortality.
resultsA total of 1 773 935 perinatal newborns were screened in Beijing and 1851 newborns were diagnosed with CCHD, showing a prevalence of 10.43 per 10 000. Among the total 1851 CCHD patients, the majority (1692 of 1851; 91.41%) were identified through prenatal diagnosis, 104 of 1851 (5.62%) were diagnosed before obstetric discharge/transfer and 55 of 1851 (2.97%) were identified through delayed diagnosis. The prevalence of CCHD in newborns was 1.96 per 10 000 births. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of survival demonstrated that gestational age at delivery was the only risk factor for death within the first week after birth.
conclusionsWithin the first week after birth, gestational age was the only risk factor for death in newborns with CCHD.
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.