ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2023
Congenital Heart Disease and Fertility: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study Including Both Men and Women.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maternal congenital heart disease: Implications for the next generation.PLoS medicine · 2026Review
- Congenital heart disease in men of reproductive age: Nationwide cohort studies of prevalence, male fertility, and birth outcomes in offspring.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2025Article
- Time trends and birth rates in women with congenital heart disease; a nationwide cohort study from Norway 1994-2014.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2024Article
- Time to childbirth and assisted reproductive treatment in women with congenital heart disease.Open heart · 2024Article
- Review
- Gynaecological health in adult congenital heart disease women: Addressing menorrhagia, infertility, contraception, menopause.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Despite an increasing number of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) reaching reproductive age, the fertility of these patients remains undescribed. Therefore, the aim of the study was to evaluate the fertility in men and women with CHD by estimating the risk of infertility and comparing the birth rates, proportions of individuals becoming parents or remaining childless, and the number of children per parent with unaffected individuals. Methods and Results The study population consisted of individuals born between 1977 and 2000. Information on CHD, infertility, and live born children were obtained from the Danish health registries. Hazard ratios for infertility were analyzed using a Cox regression model. Differences of proportions and birth rates were calculated and compared between groups. Among 1 385 895 individuals, a total of 8679 (0.6%) were diagnosed with CHD. Men and women with simple or moderate CHD had no increased risk of infertility when compared with the reference population. Estimates for complex CHD groups were too imprecise for evaluation. Individuals with CHD were more often childless with consequently lower birth rates compared with unaffected individuals. However, those becoming parents had the same number of children as the reference population. Conclusions Men and women with simple or moderate CHD had the same risk of infertility as the reference population. Despite patients with CHD more often being childless, those becoming parents had the same number of children as parents without CHD. The current findings increase the knowledge regarding fertility in the CHD population.
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.