ArticlePediatric research2026
Characterizing neurodevelopmental follow-up attendance of children with congenital heart disease.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. 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.
- Developmental Systems Cardiology: A Longitudinal Adaptive Framework for Congenital Heart Disease.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Near-infrared spectroscopy cerebral oximetry in pediatric congenital heart disease with cardiopulmonary bypass: a narrative review of current evidence and neuroprotection.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCharacterize attendance at neurodevelopmental follow-up for congenital heart disease (CHD) from infancy to young adulthood, as well as identify individual, family, and neighborhood-level correlates of low attendance.
methodsPrimary caregivers (N = 578) of children with CHD aged 0-21 years in the United States, stratified into six age groups, reported whether their child had attended neurodevelopmental follow-up at various time points. Caregiver reports were also used to collect information on the child's clinical and family psychosocial characteristics. ZIP codes provided neighborhood-level information.
resultsOverall, 51% (n = 296/578) of children with CHD had attended at least one age-appropriate neurodevelopmental follow-up. Attendance relative to age-appropriate appointments decreased with age, with <3% aged 6-21 years attending 100% of age-appropriate follow-up. Low (<50% age-appropriate) attendance was associated (p < 0.05) with older child age, racial and ethnic minority group status of mother, more social support from extended family, shorter duration of first ICU stay, lack of grandparents' involvement in childcare, travel distance of ≥60 miles from pediatric cardiology center, limited economic and educational opportunities in the neighborhood, and biventricular diagnosis.
conclusionsThe findings underscore the necessity of targeted intervention, with a particular emphasis on the social determinants of health framework, to improve the attendance of children with CHD at neurodevelopmental follow-up. IMPACT: In a U.S. sample, primary caregivers reported that 51% of children with congenital heart disease attended at least one age-appropriate neurodevelopmental follow-up appointment. Attendance rates declined with age, and clinical factors like shorter initial ICU stay and biventricular diagnosis were associated with low attendance. Low attendance was also associated with non-clinical factors like maternal race and ethnicity, family social support, proximity to the cardiology center, and economic and educational opportunities in the neighborhood, highlighting the importance of taking social determinants of health into account while considering opportunities to increase neurodevelopmental follow-up attendance.
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.