Corrigendum to ‘A comparison of criteria for defining metabolic acidemia in live born neonates and its effect on predicting serious adverse neonatal outcomes’. [American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 229/4 (2023) 439-440]

The authors regret an error in the manuscript and the long video narration. In the last sentence of the results section of the manuscript, the text should read, “Furthermore, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the ACOG criteria was calculated at 3.6% and the negative predictive value (NPV) at 99.9%, whereas the PPV of the NICHD criteria was computed at 1.5% and the NPV at 99.9%.” This has been corrected in the manuscript and in the results of the long video narration. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. A comparison of criteria for defining metabolic acidemia in live-born neonates and its effect on predicting serious adverse neonatal outcomesAmerican Journal of Obstetrics & GynecologyVol. 229Issue 4PreviewMetabolic acidemia is a known risk factor for serious adverse neonatal outcomes in both preterm and term infants. Full-Text PDF