ArticleHealth care management science2005
Explaining source of payment differences in U.S. cesarean rates: why do privately insured mothers receive more cesareans than mothers who are not privately insured?
Article in Health care management science, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Caesarean section in uninsured women in the USA: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Cesarean Section Rates and Mobile Health's Role in Equitable Access to Prenatal Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Caesarean sections and health financing: a global analysis.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Participation in the state led 'Janani Sahayogi Yojana' public private partnership program to promote facility births in Madhya Pradesh, India: views from private obstetrician partners.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Article
- Article
- Two practice models in one labor and delivery unit: association with cesarean delivery rates.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2015Article
- Do caesarean section rates 'catch-up'? Evidence from 14 European countries.Health care management science · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The difference in the risk-adjusted cesarean rates of mothers who are and who are not privately insured is divided into components attributable to the following four factors: the practice style of the physician attending the birth, the closeness of the physician-mother relationship, individual nonclinical factors, and the direct influence of private insurance on the physician's treatment decision. Estimates from two expansive, complementary data sets indicate that the most of the differential is attributable to the first two factors, particularly the pairing of privately insured mothers with physicians who are inclined to perform cesareans. There is some evidence that these pairings are not incidental but the result of firm (and possibly consumer) choices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15782508What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.