ArticlePediatric research2026
Family and health professional perspectives of the CHD LIFE cardiac developmental long-term care pathway: a qualitative evaluation.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Increasing the reach of developmental services among children with congenital heart disease.Pediatric research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluates the implementation and impact of the Congenital Heart Disease Long-term Improvements in Functional hEalth (CHD LIFE) decentralized care pathway in Australia. It explores perspectives of families and healthcare professionals, identifying key enablers, barriers, and opportunities for improvement.
methodsA qualitative evaluation was conducted using semi-structured interviews and reflexive thematic analysis. Purposeful and convenience sampling recruited (a) parents (n = 37) of children with CHD referred for developmental follow-up via the CHD LIFE pathway and (b) key service providers and organizational stakeholders (n = 23).
resultsFindings were organized into implementation, perceived impact, and improvement summary domains. Families and providers generally found decentralization of the pathway acceptable and contextually appropriate, but not without challenges. Implementation was enabled by the pathway's co-design, centralized foundations, and system alignment, but challenged by variability in local capacity, provider engagement, and substantial reliance on families. Perceived impacts were noted for providers, parents, and children, including capacity building. Stakeholders identified a range of tangible improvements to enhance equity and sustainability.
conclusionsCHD LIFE presents a promising decentralized, family-centered follow-up model improving access and supporting local care. Strengthening support mechanisms for families and providers remains essential to promote equity, reduce burden, and ensure sustainable implementation across diverse settings. IMPACT: The CHD LIFE care pathway demonstrates the feasibility and acceptability of a decentralized neurodevelopmental follow-up model for children with congenital heart disease, reducing geographic and logistical barriers while promoting family-centered care. Findings contribute to the discourse around alternative care models, highlighting the barriers, enablers, and impacts of decentralized care implementation. The study also highlights the need for structured support systems, ongoing provider engagement, and more standardized processes to ensure equitable and sustainable care delivery. This work informs future policy and practice, offering a scalable model for cardiac neurodevelopmental follow-up, which may potentially be adaptable to other healthcare contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.