Recovery of metabolic acidosis in term infants with postasphyxial hypoxic‐ischemic encephalopathy*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To describe the base deficit (BD) values and the rate of postnatal recovery of the BD of infants with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy due to intrapartum asphyxia; and to explore the relationships between the rate of recovery of BD, severe adverse outcome and different time patterns (acute total vs prolonged partial) of asphyxia. METHODS: Clinical and laboratory data were collected from the neonatal period (n = 244) and outcome data to a minimal age of 1 y (n = 218). Rates of recovery of BD were described in four 60 min blocks of time. The values of rate of recovery were compared between the outcome groups, ignoring correlation structure within subjects and with adjustment by the generalized estimating equations method. RESULTS: The BD normalized within 4 h of birth in all but 9 of 244 infants. The rates of recovery of BD in infants with good and severe adverse outcome respectively were 0.11 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.07, 0.14] and 0.09 (95% CI 0.07, 0.12) mmol l(-1) min(-1) over the first 4 h after birth. The rates of recovery were similar with or without buffer therapy, and after acute near-total and prolonged partial asphyxia. CONCLUSION: The BD in the great majority of infants with severe intrapartum asphyxia normalizes within 4 h of birth. The BD recovery rate of infants with adverse outcomes was similar to those with relatively good outcome. The different time patterns of asphyxial episode were not associated with differential recovery profiles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".