ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2024
Investigation of the Clinical Value of Four Visualization Modalities for Congenital Heart Disease.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Usability Evaluation of a Mixed Reality Platform in Pediatric Interventional Cardiology by Specialist Physicians: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Advances in Cardiovascular Imaging: A Platform to Share Recent Research Findings Through Utilization of Advanced Imaging Technologies.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnosing congenital heart disease (CHD) remains challenging because of its complex morphology. Representing the intricate structures of CHD on conventional two-dimensional flat screens is difficult owing to wide variations in the pathologies. Technological advancements, such as three-dimensional-printed heart models (3DPHMs) and virtual reality (VR), could potentially address the limitations of viewing complex structures using conventional methods. This study aimed to investigate the usefulness and clinical value of four visualization modalities across three different cases of CHD, including ventricular septal defect, double-outlet right ventricle, and tetralogy of Fallot. Seventeen cardiac specialists were invited to participate in this study, which was aimed at assessing the usefulness and clinical value of four visualization modalities, namely, digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) images, 3DPHM, VR, and 3D portable document format (PDF). Out of these modalities, 76.4% of the specialists ranked VR as the best for understanding the spatial associations between cardiac structures and for presurgical planning. Meanwhile, 94.1% ranked 3DPHM as the best modality for communicating with patients and their families. Of the various visualization modalities, VR was the best tool for assessing anatomical locations and vessels, comprehending the spatial relationships between cardiac structures, and presurgical planning. The 3DPHM models were the best tool for medical education as well as communication. In summary, both 3DPHM and VR have their own advantages and outperform the other two modalities, i.e., DICOM images and 3D PDF, in terms of visualizing and managing CHD.
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.