Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28109562›Full record

Observational studyWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health

Primary Cesarean Delivery Patterns among Women with Physical, Sensory, or Intellectual Disabilities.

Blair G Darney, Frances M Biel, Brian P Quigley, Aaron B Caughey, Willi Horner-Johnson

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.

Blair G DarneyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; National Institute of Public Health, Center for Health Systems Research, Cuernavaca, Mexico.
Frances M BielDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Brian P QuigleyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Aaron B CaugheyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Willi Horner-JohnsonInstitute on Development and Disability, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon. Electronic address: hornerjo@ohsu.edu.
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

Oregon Patient Centered Outcomes Research K12 ProgramK12HS022981 · AHRQ · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI GUISE, JEANNE-MARIE · 2014 to 2018
$4.1M
Prevalence and outcomes of pregnancy in women with disabilitiesR21HD081309 · NICHD · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI HORNER-JOHNSON, WILLI · 2014 to 2015
$419k
AHRQ HHS K12 HS022981NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD081309
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about the relationship between disability and mode of delivery. Prior research has indicated elevated risk of cesarean delivery among women with certain disabilities, but has not examined patterns across multiple types of disability or by parity.

objectiveThis study sought to determine whether physical, sensory, or intellectual and developmental disabilities are independently associated with primary cesarean delivery.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of all deliveries in California from 2000 to 2010 using linked birth certificate and hospital discharge data. We identified physical, sensory, and intellectual and developmental disabilities using International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, clinical modification codes. We used logistic regression to examine the association of these disabilities and primary cesarean delivery, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and comorbidities, and stratified by parity.

resultsIn our sample, 0.45% of deliveries (20,894/4,610,955) were to women with disabilities. A greater proportion of women with disabilities were nulliparous, had public insurance, and had comorbidities (e.g., gestational diabetes) compared with women without disabilities (p < .001 for all). The proportion of primary cesarean in women with disabilities was twice that in women without disabilities (32.7% vs. 16.3%; p < .001; adjusted odds ratio, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.94-2.17). The proportion of deliveries by cesarean was highest among women with physical disabilities due to injuries compared with women without disabilities (57.8% vs. 16.3%; p < .001; adjusted odds ratio, 6.83; 95% confidence interval, 5.46-8.53).

conclusionsWomen across disability subgroups have higher odds of cesarean delivery, and there is heterogeneity by disability type. More attention is needed to this population to ensure better understanding of care practices that may impact maternal and perinatal outcomes.

Indexed as

AdultCaliforniaCesarean SectionDelivery, ObstetricDevelopmental DisabilitiesFemaleHumansIntellectual DisabilityParityPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeReproductive HistoryRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID28109562
PMCPMC5435518
OpenAlexW2575430799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.