ArticleAIMS public health2017
Fear, Risk, and the Responsible Choice: Risk Narratives and Lowering the Rate of Caesarean Sections in High-income Countries.
Article in AIMS public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Concept Analysis of the Dynamics of Risk, Midwifery Agency and the Maternity Early Warning Tool.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Perceptions of community on the preference of cesarean section deliveries: A qualitative study in the state of Andhra Pradesh, India.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Nurturing futures through the maternal microbiome.Sociology of health & illness · 2025Article
- COVID-19 Pandemic and Birth Experience. The Monopoly of Caesarean Sections. A Critical Realist Review.Maedica · 2021Article
- Lower, Variable Intrathecal Opioid Doses, and the Incidence of Prolonged Fetal Heart Rate Decelerations After Combined Spinal Epidural Analgesia for Labor: A Quality Improvement Analysis.Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care · 2020Article
- Respectful midwifery care during the COVID-19 pandemic.European journal of midwifery · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Canada, as elsewhere in the world, caesarean sections are the most common surgical procedure performed in hospitals annually. Recent national statistics indicate 28% of infants in Canada are born by c-section while in the United States that number rises to 33%. This is despite World Health Organization recommendations that at a population level only 10-15% of births warrant this form of medical intervention. This trend has become cause for concern in recent decades due to the short and long-term health risks to pregnant women and infants, as well as the financial burden it places on public health care systems. Others warn this trend may result in a collective loss of cultural knowledge of a normal physiological process and, in the process, establish a new "normal" childbirth. Despite a range of interventions to curb c-section rates-enhanced prenatal care and innovation in pregnancy monitoring, change in hospital level policies, procedures and protocols, as well as public education campaigns-they remain stubbornly resistant to stabilization, let alone, reduction in high-income countries. We explore-through a review of the academic and grey literature-the role of cultural and social narratives around risk, and the responsibilization of the pregnant woman and the medical practitioner in creating this kind of resistance to intervention today.
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.