ArticleReproductive health2017
Repeat cesarean section in subsequent gestation of women from a birth cohort in Brazil.
Article in Reproductive health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- FIGO good practice recommendations for vaginal birth after cesarean section.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Guideline
- Comparative analysis of extraperitoneal versus transabdominal cesarean sections: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and systematic review.BMC surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Determinants of Cesarean Delivery During Wartime in Atbara, Sudan: A Case-Control Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- Women's preference for a vaginal birth in Brazilian private hospitals: effects of a quality improvement project.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Determinants of cesarean mode of childbirth among Rwandan women of childbearing age: Evidence from the 2019-2020 Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey (RDHS).Public health challenges · 2024Article
- High Rates of Repeated Caesarean Section Deliveries and its Associated Maternal and Foetal Complications at A Tertiary Hospital in Northern Tanzania.The East African health research journal · 2024Article
- Individual and community-level factors associated with caesarean section in Haiti: secondary analysis of data from the 2016-2017 Haitian Demographic and Health Survey.Tropical medicine and health · 2023Article
- Impact of prepregnancy body mass index on adverse pregnancy outcomes: analysis from the Longitudinal Indian Family hEalth cohort study.AJOG global reports · 2023Article
- Outcome of Induction of Labor with Foley's Catheter in Women with Previous One Cesarean Section with Unfavorable Cervix: An Experience From a Tertiary Care Institute in South India.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2022Article
- Factors influencing decision-making to accept elective caesarean section: A descriptive cross-sectional study.Heliyon · 2021Article
- Prevalence of Repeat Cesarean Section in a Tertiary Care Hospital.JNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association · 2020Article
- Prevalence, Indications, and Community Perceptions of Caesarean Section Delivery in Ngora District, Eastern Uganda: Mixed Method Study.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2020Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe current literature indicates increasing concern regarding the number of safe cesarean sections which a woman can undergo, mainly in face of the high cesarean section rates, which are growing in Brazil and worldwide. Aimed to describe the prevalence and associated factors of repeat cesarean section in a cohort of Brazilian women who had a cesarean section in the first birth.
methodsThis is a prospective cohort study using data from the 2004 Pelotas Birth Cohort. The sample included 480 women who had their first delivery in 2004, regardless of the form of delivery, and who had a second delivery identified in the cohort's follow-ups (in 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2010). Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses using Poisson regression with robust error variance were carried out.
resultsAmong the women who underwent a cesarean section in their first delivery (49.47%), 87.44% had a second surgical delivery. The risk factors for repeat cesarean section included ages 21-34 (PR 1.67, CI 95% 1.07-2.60), not being seen by SUS (Public Healthcare System) in 2004 (PR 2.27, CI 95% 1.44-3.60), and the number of prenatal medical visits, i.e., women with ten or more visits were at 2.33 times higher risk (CI 95% 1.10-4.96) compared to those who had five or fewer visits.
conclusionsThe proportion of cesarean sections both in the first and in the subsequent delivery is quite high. This high rate may compromise the reproductive future of the women who undergo consecutive cesarean sections with possible consequent complications and changes in care policies for pregnant women should be implemented.
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.