Observational studyJournal of the American College of Cardiology2026
Public Reporting and Case Selection in Congenital Heart Surgery: Signals From a Multicenter Observational Study.
Observational study in Journal of the American College of 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
backgroundPublic reporting for congenital heart surgery promotes transparency and quality improvement but has the potential for the unintended consequence of risk avoidance. To assess this possibility, it is necessary to understand both changes in case selection and outcomes after public reporting.
objectivesThis study sought to examine the association between adoption of public reporting with hospital performance and predicted probability of mortality as a measure of case-mix complexity.
methodsUsing the Inpatient Essentials Database, we identified all congenital heart surgeries performed at centers who elected to participate in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons-Congenital Heart Surgery Database public reporting program 2016 to 2019. Surgeries were stratified into pre- and post-public reporting cases based on the midpoint of the year in which each hospital adopted public reporting. Interrupted time-series with generalized estimating equations was used to quantify associations between public reporting and the outcomes of interest, and supplemented with observed/expected mortality before and after public reporting.
resultsAmong 16,401 congenital heart surgeries from 18 centers, 9,409 cases were performed before and 6,992 after public reporting. Overall, there were 500 (3.0%) in-hospital deaths. The unadjusted odds of in-hospital mortality following adoption of public reporting dropped by 35% (95% CI: 15%-50%; P = 0.002; absolute risk: 2.5% vs 3.4%), but this difference was no longer significant after adjusting for case complexity (95% CI: -2.97 to 0.43; P = 0.14). Importantly, the predicted probability of mortality decreased 0.5 percentage points (95% CI: 0.1-0.8; P = 0.006) immediately after hospitals adopted public reporting, suggesting an acute change in case selection. There was higher than expected mortality at the beginning of the study period that declined before public reporting.
conclusionsThe association of public reporting with mortality is complex. Given no change in risk-standardized mortality, the lower unadjusted mortality after public reporting in these 18 centers appears to reflect both an improvement in observed/expected mortality before reporting, along with a selection of lower-risk cases after public reporting.
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.