ArticleMaternal and child health journal2013
Rates and success rates of trial of labor after cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990-2009.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Success rate and obstetric outcomes of trial of labor after cesarean delivery-Decision-tree analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Article
- Trial of labor after caesarean section in low risk pregnancies: is it risky?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Risk factors for complete uterine rupture in patients with trial of labor after cesarean delivery.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Duration of labor stages and pregnancy outcomes in vaginal birth after cesarean: a retrospective comparative analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Application of a specific clinical pathway can affect the choice of trial of labor in patients with a history of cesarean delivery.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Observational
- Recent trends in term trial of labor after cesarean by number of prior cesarean deliveries.AJOG global reports · 2023Article
- The rates of vaginal births after cesarean section have increased during the last decades: a nationwide register-based cohort study in Finland.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
- Trial of labour versus elective caesarean delivery for estimated large for gestational age foetuses after prior caesarean delivery: a multicenter retrospective study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Trends in Attempted and Successful Trial of Labor After Cesarean Delivery in the United States From 2010 to 2020.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Association between Robson classification groups and cesarean delivery: a longitudinal analysis in Mongolia.AJOG global reports · 2022Article
- Uterine rupture risk in a trial of labor after cesarean section with and without previous vaginal births.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Cesarean section rates in Brazil: Trend analysis using the Robson classification system.Medicine · 2020Article
- Outcomes of trial of labor after cesarean birth by provider type in low-risk women.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2020Article
- Article
- Women's preference for vaginal birth after a first delivery by cesarean.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2019Article
- Trial of labour after caesarean section and the risk of neonatal and infant death: a nationwide cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Article
- Effect of stage of initial labor dystocia on vaginal birth after cesarean success.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2015Article
- The Association between Hospital Frequency of Labor after Cesarean and Outcomes in California.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's HealthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compares rates of trial of labor after Cesarean delivery (TOLAC) and rates of successful TOLAC between 1990 and 2009. Serial cross-sectional analyses were performed using the National Hospital Discharge Survey data to compare rates of TOLAC and TOLAC success between 1990 and 2009. Joinpoint regression was used to assess trends over time, and logistic regression with marginal effects was used to examine the unadjusted and adjusted significance and magnitude of trends. The rate of TOLAC reached a high of 51.8 % (95 % CI 47.8-55.8 %) in 1995 and a low of 15.9 % (95 % CI 13.8-18.0 %) in 2006, declined, on average, 4.2 (95 % CI -4.8 to -3.9) percentage points per year between 1996 and 2005. Rates increased significantly from 1990 to 1996 and 2005 to 2009. TOLAC success was at its highest rate in 2000, 69.8 % (95 % CI 65.2-74.3 %) and its lowest in 2008, 38.5 % (95 % CI 28.1-48.8 %). The rate of TOLAC success increased significantly between 1990 and 2000, but declined thereafter an average of 3.4 % points per year (95 % CI -4.3 to -2.5). The rate of TOLAC in the US decreased between 1996 and 2005 and the rate of successful TOLAC has declined from 2000 to 2009.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22991012What 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.