Enhancing the Classification of Congenital Heart Defects for Outcome Association Studies in Birth Defects Registries

Author:

Stephens Sara B.12ORCID,Benjamin Renata H.1ORCID,Lopez Keila N.2ORCID,Anderson Brett R.3,Lin Angela E.4,Shumate Charles J.5ORCID,Nembhard Wendy N.6ORCID,Morris Shaine A.2ORCID,Agopian A. J.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, School of Public Health The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston Houston Texas USA

2. Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics Texas Children's Hospital and Baylor College of Medicine Houston Texas USA

3. Division of Pediatric Cardiology New York‐Presbyterian and Columbia University Irving Medical Center New York New York USA

4. Department of Pediatrics, Medical Genetics Unit Mass General for Children and Harvard University School of Medicine Boston Massachusetts USA

5. Texas Department of State Health Services Austin Texas USA

6. Arkansas Center for Birth Defects Research and Prevention and Arkansas Reproductive Health Monitoring System, Fay Boozman College of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock Arkansas USA

Abstract

ABSTRACTIntroductionTraditional strategies for grouping congenital heart defects (CHDs) using birth defect registry data do not adequately address differences in expected clinical consequences between different combinations of CHDs. We report a lesion‐specific classification system for birth defect registry–based outcome studies.MethodsFor Core Cardiac Lesion Outcome Classifications (C‐CLOC) groups, common CHDs expected to have reasonable clinical homogeneity were defined. Criteria based on combinations of Centers for Disease and Control‐modified British Pediatric Association (BPA) codes were defined for each C‐CLOC group. To demonstrate proof of concept and retention of reasonable case counts within C‐CLOC groups, Texas Birth Defect Registry data (1999–2017 deliveries) were used to compare case counts and neonatal mortality between traditional vs. C‐CLOC classification approaches.ResultsC‐CLOC defined 59 CHD groups among 62,262 infants with CHDs. Classifying cases into the single, mutually exclusive C‐CLOC group reflecting the highest complexity CHD present reduced case counts among lower complexity lesions (e.g., 86.5% of cases with a common atrium BPA code were reclassified to a higher complexity group for a co‐occurring CHD). As expected, C‐CLOC groups had retained larger sample sizes (i.e., representing presumably better‐powered analytic groups) compared to cases with only one CHD code and no occurring CHDs.DiscussionThis new CHD classification system for investigators using birth defect registry data, C‐CLOC, is expected to balance clinical outcome homogeneity in analytic groups while maintaining sufficiently large case counts within categories, thus improving power for CHD‐specific outcome association comparisons. Future outcome studies utilizing C‐CLOC‐based classifications are planned.

Funder

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Health Resources and Services Administration

Texas Department of State Health Services

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3