ArticleJAMIA open2025
Automated phenotyping of congenital heart disease for dynamic patient aggregation and outcome reporting.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Accurate characterization of patients with congenital heart disease is fundamental to research, outcomes reporting, quality improvement, and clinical decision-making. Here we present an approach to computing the anatomy of patients with congenital heart disease based on the whole of their diagnostic and surgical codes. Materials and Methods: All diagnostic and procedure codes for patients cared for between 1981 and 2020 at Boston Children's Hospital were extracted from a database containing diagnostic codes from echocardiograms, and procedural codes from surgical and catheterization procedures. The pipeline sequentially (1) mapped each of the 7500 native codes to algorithm codes; (2) computed the parent anatomy for each study using a pre-defined hierarchy; (3) computed the parent anatomy for the patient, based on highest ranking parent anatomy; and (4) computed the subcategories and mandatory co-variate findings for each patient. Thereafter, diagnostic accuracy of 500 unseen patients was adjudicated against clinical documentation by clinical experts. Results: A total of 514 541 echocardiograms on 161 735 patients were available for this study. Phenotypes of congenital cardiac diseases were assigned in 84 285 patients (52%), and the remainder were computed to have normal anatomy. Clinicians agreed with algorithm assignments in 96.4% (482 of 500 patients), with disagreements most often representing definitional differences. An interactive dashboard enabled by the output of this algorithm is presented. Conclusions: The computation of detailed congenital heart defect phenotypes from raw diagnostic and procedure codes is possible with a high degree of accuracy and efficiency. This framework may enable tools to support interactive outcomes reporting and clinical decision support.
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.