Is it Time to End the Use of Base Deficit for Fetal Well-being Assessment?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024;231(3):315–320. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.01.031) The traditional reliance on the base deficit (BD) in umbilical artery blood as an indicator of fetal health and forecast of neonatal brain injury is being scrutinized closely due to weak evidence to support use and poor predictive performance. Although it has been a standard in clinical practice for over 50 years, BD's dependability is undermined by inherent problems in its relevance to fetal physiology and controversial types and calculations. Existing BD equations rely on adult acid-base metrics (pH 7.40 and partial CO2 pressure of 40 mm Hg) and do not consider the distinct in utero conditions where fetal pH and CO2 concentrations vary considerably. This oversight results in errors when identifying neonatal metabolic acidosis and may mislead doctors in handling fetal distress or anticipating negative neonatal results.
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 | 0.018 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".