Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11279676›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2001

Elective versus selective caesarean section for delivery of the small baby.

A Grant, C M Glazener

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery for preterm birth in singletons.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  2. Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery for preterm birth in singletons.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

A GrantHealth Services Research Unit, The Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, UK, AB9 2ZD. a.grant@abdn.ac.uk
C M Glazener

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElective caesarean delivery for women in preterm labour might reduce the chances of fetal or neonatal death, but it might also increase the risk of maternal morbidity.

objectivesTo assess the effects of a policy of elective caesarean delivery versus selective caesarean delivery for women in preterm labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register was searched. Date of last search: September 2000. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing a policy of elective caesarean delivery versus expectant management with recourse to caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer assessed eligibility and trial quality, and both contributed to the update. MAIN

resultsSix studies involving 122 women were included. All trials reported recruiting difficulties. No significant differences between elective and selective policies for caesarean delivery were found for fetal, neonatal or maternal outcomes. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThere is not enough evidence to evaluate the use of a policy for elective caesarean delivery for small babies. Randomised trials in this area are likely to continue to experience recruitment problems. However, it still may be possible to investigate elective caesarean delivery in preterm babies with cephalic presentations.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionElective Surgical ProceduresObstetric Labor, PrematureFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematurePregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID11279676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.