ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2025
Associations of Physician Perspectives, Personal Choices, and Counseling for Severe Congenital Heart Defects.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Factors Associated with Termination of Pregnancy Recommendations Following Prenatal Diagnosis of Congenital Heart Disease: A Multidisciplinary Council-Based Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Treatment Options Offered to Infants with Single Ventricle Physiology and Genetic Aneuploidy: A Survey of US Pediatric Intensivists, Cardiologists, and Cardiothoracic Surgeons.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Associations of Physician Perspectives, Personal Choices, and Counseling for Severe Congenital Heart Defects.Prenatal diagnosis · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether physicians' perspectives of outcomes or personal choices are associated with prenatal counseling for termination of pregnancy (TOP) or perinatal hospice for severe congenital heart defects (CHDs).
methodMulticenter survey of pediatric cardiologists and congenital heart surgeons in the United States, 2016-2018. The survey measured perspectives of CHD outcomes, personal choices/considerations, and prenatal counseling for TOP or perinatal hospice. Bivariate comparisons estimated associations between outcome perspectives, personal choices, and counseling.
resultsResponse rate was 77% (135/176); 47% (63/135) believed that single-ventricle portends good long-term quality of life or transplant-free survival. The majority (70%-90% depending on CHD type) would consider perinatal hospice for their own child, but a minority (2%-16% depending on CHD type) would choose perinatal hospice over TOP or postnatal intervention. Physicians who would consider TOP for themselves/their partner were more likely to counsel about TOP than physicians who would not consider TOP for themselves/their partner (99% vs. 67%, p < 0.001). There were no associations between institutional practice, outcome perspectives, personal consideration for hospice, and counseling practices.
conclusionPhysician perspectives of single-ventricle outcomes remain guarded but were not associated with counseling. However, personal choices/considerations are associated with counseling practices; therefore, considering personal beliefs is crucial to help families make fully informed decisions.
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.