ReviewJournal of women's health (2002)2017
What Are Optimal Cesarean Section Rates in the U.S. and How Do We Get There? A Review of Evidence-Based Recommendations and Interventions.
Review in Journal of women's health (2002), 2017. 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.
- Article
- Temporal-spatial trends in childbirth in Ontario, Canada.PloS one · 2026Article
- The Association of the COVID-19 Pandemic With Disparities in Maternal Outcomes.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2025Article
- 'Everyone in my family has C-sections': increased likelihood of caesarean birth in family lineages in the United States.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Regional differences in autism and intellectual disability risk associated with cesarean section delivery.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2024Article
- How Much is too Much? High Utilization of Prenatal Care and Its Impact on Primary Cesarean Birth Among Women in the United States.Maternal and child health journal · 2024Article
- Trends and determinants of caesarean section in South Asian countries: Bangladesh, Nepal, and Pakistan.PloS one · 2024Article
- The risk of childhood brain tumors associated with delivery interventions: A Danish matched case-control study.Cancer epidemiology · 2022Article
- Prevalence and factors associated with caesarean section in a comprehensive specialized hospital of Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study; 2020.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
- Variability in cesarean delivery rates among individual labor and delivery nurses compared to physicians at three attribution time points.Health services research · 2021Observational
- Spontaneous vaginal birth varies significantly across US hospitals.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2021Article
- Postnatal pediatric systemic antibiotic episodes during the first three years of life are not associated with mode of delivery.PloS one · 2020Article
- Mode of delivery and mortality among neonates with gastroschisis: A population-based cohort in Texas.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2019Article
- Long-term effect of pregnancy-related factors on the development of endometrial neoplasia: A nationwide retrospective cohort study.PloS one · 2019Article
- The effect of advanced maternal age on perinatal outcomes in nulliparous singleton pregnancies.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2018Article
- The Neonatal Microbiome and Its Partial Role in Mediating the Association between Birth by Cesarean Section and Adverse Pediatric Outcomes.Neonatology · 2018Review
- Predictors of the recurrence of surgically removed previous caesarean skin scars at caesarean section: A retrospective cohort study.Scars, burns & healingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cesarean sections (CSs) are the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the world today. Global epidemiological studies from the last decade suggest that the optimal CS rates in developed countries exist somewhere between 15% and 19%. Despite these findings, CS rates in the United States have remained stable at slightly over 32% over the past 10 years. Using primary and secondary literature published from 2010 to 2015, this review discusses how optimal CS rates were developed. In addition, we define a category of potentially avoidable CS (i.e., those conducted on nulliparous low-risk women who present with vertex infants at term) and explore how CS in this population appear to be one of the main drivers of high CS rates overall. The institutional, provider, and patient-related factors, which may be related to higher-than-recommended rates of CS, particularly those conducted in low-risk women, will be discussed. This review will then delve into clinician and patient-oriented interventions that have been shown to effectively reduce the rate of potentially avoidable CS. Our analysis showed that large-scale, multifaceted interventions that include audit and feedback cycles as well as peer review strategies were the most effective in decreasing rates of potentially avoidable CS. This review concludes with an agenda for future research into interventions that aim to achieve optimal CS rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.