Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40576650›Full record

ArticlePediatric cardiology2026

Car Seat Tolerance Screening for Infants with Critical Congenital Heart Disease.

Emily Sangillo, Emily Pryal, Natalie L Davis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Emily SangilloDepartment of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. esangil1@jhmi.edu.
Emily PryalUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Natalie L DavisUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preterm and low birth weight (LBW) infants are at risk for cardiorespiratory instability in the semi-upright car seat position. Other "at-risk" infants include those with critical congenital heart disease (CCHD), though there are no formal recommendations for screening in this population. The objectives of this study were (1) to assess car seat tolerance screening (CSTS) practices in patients with CCHD at our institution and (2) to understand the epidemiology of this population, including incidence and risk factors for CSTS failure. We performed a retrospective medical record review of neonates with CCHD admitted between 2013 and 2020. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were used to characterize CSTS performance and failure risks in this patient population. We identified 211 patients as having CCHD, of whom 171 infants underwent CSTS (81%) and 10 infants failed (6%). When comparing those who passed or failed their CSTS by cardiac lesion type (left heart, right heart, or mixing lesions), there were no statistically significant differences, nor did clinical or demographic characteristics predict failure. There were no significant differences in readmission or death within 30 days of discharge. This is the largest study of CSTS exclusively in infants with CCHD. We identified a 6% failure rate, which is comparable to failure rates reported in preterm and LBW infants, suggesting that more formal recommendations for screening in this population are needed.

Indexed as

Child Restraint SystemsHeart Defects, CongenitalFemaleHumansInfantInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornMaleRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsCar seat tolerance screeningCritical congenital heart diseaseInfantNeonate

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.