ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
Assessment of Early Development in Congenital Heart Disease Using a Novel Caregiver Rating Method.
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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Early identification of the infants with critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) exhibiting developmental delays would allow for timely interventions to reduce adverse longer-term consequences. Web-based caregiver assessments of developmental milestones complement direct testing as a means for identifying delays outside of the clinic setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of a recently developed caregiver rating of early development, the PediaTrac™, as an alternative to ratings of developmental milestones in a sample of infants and toddlers with CCHD. The PediaTrac, along with ratings of developmental milestones, on the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, 3rd Edition (ASQ-3), were administered to caregivers of 45 infants and toddlers with CCHD ages 2 to 18 months. PediaTrac ratings were analyzed using item response theory modeling to obtain scores reflecting skill levels in the motor and social-communication-cognition domains. Validity was examined by comparing scores to those for a reference group of term-born infants/toddlers assessed in a prior study and to delays in milestones on the ASQ-3 and medical and sociodemographic risk factors. Motor scores were lower than expected for the CCHD sample relative to term reference group, t(44) = - 3.269, p = 0.002, indicating a high rate of motor deficits (31%). Although the CCHD sample did not differ from the reference group in the social-communication-cognition domain, lower scores in one or both domains were associated with delayed milestones on the ASQ-3, longer length of hospitalizations, and single ventricle physiology. Findings confirm delays in motor development in infants and toddlers with CCHD and support PediaTrac as a valid alternative to milestone-based caregiver screening of early development in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40665029What 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.