ArticlePediatric cardiology2025
Establishing Optimal Control Cohorts for Phase 1 Trials: Retrospective Analysis of Clinical and Biological Outcomes in Neonates and Infants Undergoing Two-Ventricle Repair.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phase 1 trials are primarily conducted to evaluate the safety and feasibility of new interventions, usually without recruiting control patients. This retrospective study aims to characterize clinical and biological outcomes in historical and contemporary cases of neonates and infants undergoing two-ventricle repair to facilitate future secondary endpoint analyses for such trials. This retrospective study included neonates/infants (ages ≤ 6 months) who underwent two-ventricle repair between 2015 and 2021 using the same criteria as our phase 1 trial (n = 199). Patients were allocated into the ventricular septal defect (n = 61), the Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF, n = 88), and the transposition of the great arteries (n = 50) groups with an additional comparison between two eras (2015-2019 vs. 2020-2021). Patient characteristics and most variables assessed were different between the three diagnostic groups indicating the importance of diagnostic matching for secondary analyses. Although the era did not alter cerebral/somatic oxygenation, ventricular function, neuroimaging findings, and complication rates, we observed improvement of inotropic and/or vasoactive-inotropic scores in all groups during the more recent era. In 2020-2021, the age and the body weight at the operation were higher, and hospital stay was shorter in the TOF group, suggesting the possible impact of the pandemic. Results also indicated that matching altered characteristics such as age at operation that may limit the temporal effects and optimize secondary analyses. Using optimal contemporary cases and historical data based on this study will assist in developing a comprehensive study design for a future efficacy/effectiveness trial.
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.