ArticleZhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences2026
[Clinical value of AI-assisted cardiac auscultation in screening for congenital heart disease in neonates].
Article in Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of replacing manual auscultation with artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted cardiac auscultation within the dual-indicator screening strategy for early detection of congenital heart disease (CHD) in neonates in a real-world clinical setting.
methodsUsing data from the provincial CHD treatment network led by the Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, we retrospectively enrolled 41 320 neonates born between July 2020 and March 2023. All neonates underwent pulse oximetry (POX), AI-assisted auscultation, and manual auscultation. The traditional screening strategy was defined as "POX+manual auscultation," and the AI-assisted strategy as "POX+AI-assisted auscultation". A positive screening result was defined as a positive finding in either POX or the corresponding auscultation method (manual or AI). Echocardiography served as the gold standard for CHD diagnosis. True positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative results were determined, and the missed-diagnosis rate, sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy were calculated. To assess the consistency of screening performance across institutions, analyses were also conducted separately in the four hospitals with the highest screening volumes.
resultsA total of 354 neonates were diagnosed with CHD by cardiac ultrasound. Compared with the traditional strategy, the intelligent strategy significantly reduced the missed-diagnosis rate (67.23%
conclusionsIn multicenter real-world practice, the intelligent screening strategy significantly reduces the missed-diagnosis rate of CHD and demonstrates stable screening performance across different institutions, suggesting AI-assisted auscultation is a feasible and clinically valuable alternative to manual auscultation in neonatal CHD screening.
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.