ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease in Tanzanian newborns: Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in a low-resource healthcare setting.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early detection of Critical Congenital Heart Disease (CCHD) is crucial for reducing infant mortality. Pulse oximetry (POX) is widely utilised for screening CCHD in high-resource settings; however, its diagnostic accuracy in low-resource environments, such as sub-Saharan Africa, remains under-researched. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of POX in screening Tanzanian newborns for CCHD. This prospective cohort study was conducted in two hospitals in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. We used pre- and post-ductal saturation (SpO2) readings prior to discharge. A positive screen was defined as SpO2 < 90%; two pre- and post-ductal SpO2 readings <95%; and/or a pre- or post-ductal difference that exceeded 3%. All newborns with positive screening tests underwent echocardiography, while those with negative tests were followed for six months. The primary outcome was POX diagnostic accuracy. The study adhered to STARD guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Between October 2020 and June 2023, 10,630 newborns were screened. The majority (5,721; 54.0%) were male, resulting in a male-to-female ratio of 1.2. The median birth weight was 3.0 (IQR: 2.6-4.4) kg. A total of 51 (0.5%) newborns tested positive on POX, of which 18 (35.3%) had congenital heart disease (CHD), and 15 (83.3%) were classified as critical, leading to a CCHD prevalence of 1.41 per 1,000 live births (95% CI: 0.70-2.13), which increased to a cumulative prevalence of 3.27 per 1,000 live births (95% CI: 2.29-4.67) at six months. With a follow-up rate of 86.7% (9,170/10,574), POX demonstrated a sensitivity of 50.0% (95% CI: 32.1-67.9), a specificity of 99.5% (95% CI: 99.4-99.7), a false-positive rate of 0.4%, and an overall accuracy of 99.5% (95% CI: 99.2-99.5). Screenings conducted between 48 and 72 hours exhibited the highest diagnostic performance, AUC 0.79 (95% CI: 0.64-0.93), with a significant odds ratio (OR) of 5.31 (95% CI: 2.45-11.49, p = 0.00001). Newborns with a birth weight <2.5 kg were less likely to have CCHD detected by POX, OR 0.403 (95% CI: 0.19-0.87, p = 0.021). POX demonstrated lower sensitivity but higher specificity and diagnostic accuracy after 48 hours. The timing of screening and birth weight affected its accuracy, indicating a need for protocol adjustment.
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.