ArticleObstetrics and gynecology2018
Association of Obstetrician Gender With Obstetric Interventions and Outcomes.
Article in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends and determinants of the use of episiotomy in a prospective population-based registry from central India.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo estimate whether there are differences in obstetric interventions or outcomes by the gender of the delivering physician.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of all nulliparous women delivering singleton, vertex, live births at 37 weeks of gestation or greater at a tertiary care institution (2014-2015). Patient clinical characteristics were analyzed by delivering physician gender. The primary outcomes were delivery mode and episiotomy. Secondary outcomes included major perineal laceration, postpartum hemorrhage, 5-minute Apgar score less than 7, cord umbilical artery pH less than 7.0, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. Univariable and hierarchical multivariable analyses including physician as a random effect were utilized for analyses.
resultsOf the 7,027 women who met inclusion criteria, 81.3% (n=5,716) were delivered by a female physician. Women delivered by female physicians were slightly younger than those delivered by male physicians and were more likely to be publicly insured (11.7% vs 7.1%, P<.001). Mode of delivery did not differ by physician gender; the cesarean delivery rate was 20.6% for male physicians and 20.5% for female physicians (P=.61). Although the episiotomy rate did differ by physician gender, with 5.9% of patients delivered by male physicians undergoing episiotomy compared with 3.6% of patients delivered by female physicians (P=.001), this finding did not persist in the multivariable model after accounting for potential confounders (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.49-1.56). There were no differences by physician gender regarding any of the examined secondary outcomes in univariable or multivariable analyses.
conclusionOutcomes of nulliparous women undergoing a trial of labor did not differ by delivering physician gender.
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.