Bibliographic record
Abstract
At term 3-4% of all babies will present by the breech. The Term Breech Trial has recently clarified whether a vaginal breech delivery at term should be avoided.1 Until now this argument has been muddied by the emotive debate about natural versus caesarean delivery, against a background of poor evidence to support or refute the safety of breech delivery for mother or baby. The Term Breech Trial showed a significant increase in perinatal mortality and morbidity (3.4%) with planned vaginal delivery. As breech presentation is itself significantly associated with poor perinatal outcome, previous observational studies have been too seriously confounded to be able to inform clinical decisions. Until this trial there had been only two randomised controlled trials comparing planned caesarean section and vaginal breech delivery at term. 2 3 These studies were small (only 313 women) but suggested a worse outcome for the mother and a better outcome for the baby if caesarean section was planned. Some obstetricians routinely performed caesarean sections for breech at term, while others selected appropriate term breech babies …
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 | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".