Cited by 26Congenital Heart Disease StudiesCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsCongenital heart defects research

A study of congenital cardiac disease in a neonatal population–the validity of echocardiography undertaken by a neonatologist

Samson, Gregory R., Kumar, Suresh R.·2004·Cardiology in the Young

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the incidence of, and profile the spread of, congenital cardiac defects, and to assess the accuracy of the echocardiographic diagnosis as performed by a neonatologist. DESIGN: Hospital-based study. METHODS: All neonates meeting our criterions, specifically those with a persistent murmur 48 hours after birth, underwent an echocardiographic examination to exclude an underlying congenital cardiac defect. All scans performed by the neonatologist were videotaped and reviewed by a paediatric cardiologist. We assessed concordance according to inter-rater agreement. RESULTS: Out of 11,085 live births, there were 83 infants with a congenital cardiac defect, giving an incidence of 7.49 per 1000 live births, with 95% confidence interval from 5.88 to 9.09. Of the infants with a murmur persisting at or greater than 48 hours after birth, who had a median age of 4.5 days, 75% had a congenital heart defect, with ventricular septal defect being the commonest, encountered in 56.7% of cases. Concordance between the neonatologist and the cardiologist was good, with Cohen's Kappa coefficient being calculated at 0.68, and 95% confidence interval from 0.51 to 0.85. CONCLUSION: The incidence of congenital cardiac malformations as determined in our hospital-based study in the United Arab Emirates is similar to that described in the Gulf region and worldwide. A persistent murmur at or greater than 48 hours after birth is strongly suggestive of an underlying congenital cardiac malformation. Our experience shows that a neonatologist appropriately trained in echocardiography can perform as well as a paediatric cardiologist. Where specialist resources are limited, this allows for early diagnosis, earlier referral if necessary, and early institution of appropriate therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s104795110400602x

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Samson, G. R., & Kumar, S. R.
Affiliations
  • Corniche Hospital (AE)
  • Mafraq Hospital (AE)
Venue
Cardiology in the Young
Published
2004-12
Volume
14
Issue
6
Pages
585-593
ISSN
  • 1047-9511 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-1107
OpenAlex
W2160967154
Cited by
26
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cardiology in the Young (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Congenital heart defects research
Keywords
congenital heart disease, neonates, echocardiography, diagnostic accuracy, interobserver agreement, ventricular septal defect, incidence, United Arab Emirates
MeSH terms
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Female, Heart Defects, Congenital, Heart Murmurs, Heart Septal Defects, Ventricular, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Neonatology, Pregnancy, Pregnancy in Diabetics, Ultrasonography, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review