ArticlePloS one2018
Robson 10-groups classification system to access C-section in two public hospitals of the Federal District/Brazil.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of the Robson classification for caesarean sections in Israel: a 10-year cross-sectional study.Israel journal of health policy research · 2025Article
- The Contribution of AIDA (Artificial Intelligence Dystocia Algorithm) to Cesarean Section Within Robson Classification Group.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- A Retrospective Analysis of the Robson Classification Implementation in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Serbia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Observational
- Recent temporal trends in cesarean section rates in Brazil according to the Robson classification system.Cadernos de saude publica · 2025Article
- An Analysis of the Mode of Delivery, Risk Factors, and Subgroups with High Caesarean Birth Rates Using Robson Classification System.Maternal and child health journal · 2024Article
- Robson classification of caesarean births: implications for reducing caesarean section rate in a private tertiary hospital in Nigeria.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Direct standardization method according to Robson classification for comparison of cesarean rates.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Leadership Driven Persistent Reduction in Cesarean Trends: An Interventional Study for Quality Improvement.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2023Article
- Using the Robson classification to assess caesarean section rates in Brazil: an observational study of more than 24 million births from 2011 to 2017.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Observational
- Gestational Risk as a Determining Factor for Cesarean Section according to the Robson Classification Groups.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Article
- Analysis of cesarean section rates using Robson ten group classification system in a tertiary teaching hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Article
- Pattern of Live Births in Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil, According to Robson Groups and the Kotelchuck Index Classification - 2015/2016.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2020Article
- A Brazilian multicentre study evaluating pregnancies induced by cabergoline in patients harboring prolactinomas.Pituitary · 2020Article
- Comparison of Maternal-Infant Attachment in Cesarean Delivery Based on Robson Classification: A Cross-Sectional Study.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe global increase in C-section rates is real. In Brazil, these indices correspond to 58.94% in the Midwest region and 52.77% in the Federal District.
objectiveTo evaluate the C-section rates and identify the groups with the greatest risk at two reference hospitals in the public network of Federal District/Brazil, using 10-Group Robson System.
methodA cross-sectional study of 6579 births assisted at the Hospital A (HA) and the Hospital B (HB) during 2013. The C-section rates in each group and its respective contribution to the total hospital C-sections was compared between HA and HB. To this, was used the proportion difference test (similar to chi-square test), with RR and 95% CI, and the logistic regression analysis (OR; 95% CI) among the groups with higher C-section/total C-section. The significance limit of p < 0.05 was defined for all tests.
resultsThe C-section rates were 50.8% at the HA and 42.3% at the HB, with 1.20 RR (95%CI = 1.13-1.28) at the HA. The highest rates were observed in Robson groups G5, G1, and G2. At the HA, G1 had a 21.5% C-section rate, which was greater than at the HB (13.8%; p < 0.05); the cesarean rates for groups G2 and G5 were higher at the HB (respectively, 18.6 and 38.1%) than at the HA (14.8 and 32.5%, respectively; p < 0.05).
conclusionThese results point out specific goals to be achieved in order to reduce abusive cesarean rates in both A and B hospitals, especially in the primigravida and in those with previous C-section.
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.