ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2018
Are obstetric outcomes affected by female genital mutilation?
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the health complications of female genital mutilation through a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Economic burden of female genital mutilation in 27 high-prevalence countries.BMJ global health · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the consequences of female genital mutilation on maternal and perinatal health outcomes in European and African countries.BMJ global health · 2020Pooled it
- The effect of intrapartum deinfibulation on obstetric outcomes and postpartum sexual function in pregnant women with Type 3 Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Female genital mutilation/cutting in women delivering in France: An observational national study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Observational
- Article
- The effect of female circumcision on maternal and neonatal outcomes after childbirth: a cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury associated with female genital mutilation/cutting and timing of deinfibulation.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- A prospective cohort study of the relationship of female genital mutilation with birth outcomes in Somalia.BMC women's health · 2022Article
- Diagnoses and procedures of inpatients with female genital mutilation/cutting in Swiss University Hospitals: a cross-sectional study.Reproductive health · 2022Article
- Risk of obstetric anal sphincter tear among primiparous women with a history of female genital mutilation, giving birth in Sweden.PloS one · 2022Article
- How to ensure policies and interventions rely on strong supporting facts to improve women's health: The case of female genital cutting, using Rosling's Factfulness approach.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2021Article
- Article
- A one-stop perineal clinic: our eleven-year experience.International urogynecology journal · 2020Observational
- 'Birds of the same feathers fly together': midwives' experiences with pregnant women and FGM/C complications - a grounded theory study in Liberia.Reproductive health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisFemale genital mutilation (FGM) has been associated with adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes, such as postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), perineal trauma, genital fistulae, obstructed labour and stillbirth. The prevalence of FGM has increased in the UK over the last decade. There are currently no studies available that have explored the obstetric impact of FGM in the UK. The aim of our study was to investigate the obstetric and neonatal outcomes of women with FGM when compared with the general population.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective case-control study of consecutive pregnant women with FGM over a 5-year period between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2013. Each woman with FGM was matched for age, ethnicity, parity and gestation with subsequent patients without FGM (control cohort) over the same 5-year period. Outcomes assessed were mode of delivery, duration of labour, estimated blood loss, analgaesia, perineal trauma and foetal outcomes.
resultsA total of 242 eligible women (121 FGM, 121 control) were identified for the study. There was a significant increase in the use of episiotomy in the FGM group (p = 0.009) and a significant increase in minor PPH in the control group during caesarean sections (p = 0.0001). There were no differences in all other obstetric and neonatal parameters.
conclusionsIn our unit, FGM was not associated with an increased incidence of adverse obstetric and foetal morbidity or mortality.
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.