SynthesisPloS one2018
Non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section targeted at organisations, facilities and systems: Systematic review of qualitative studies.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing Rates of Cesarean Delivery in Rural US Communities: A Systematic Review of Interventions and Approaches to Care.Preventing chronic disease · 2026Pooled it
- The effectiveness of financial intervention strategies for reducing caesarean section rates: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2019Pooled it
- Women and clinicians' views, preferences and experiences of caesarean section and vaginal birth in India: a qualitative substudy of the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) trial.BMJ global health · 2025Trial
- A cluster-randomized field trial to reduce cesarean section rates with a multifaceted intervention in Shanghai, China.BMC medicine · 2020Trial
- Article
- Financial and regulatory interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections: An updated scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Exploring the influence of medical staffing and birth volume on observed-to-expected cesarean deliveries: a panel data analysis of integrated obstetric and gynecological departments in Germany.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Women's perspectives of decision-making for labour and birth: a qualitative antenatal-postnatal paired interview study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Re-Striking the Indications in the Improvement of Avoidable Caesarian Section: A Cluster Randomized Control Trial.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Reducing caesarean section rates in Robson groups 1 and 3: a quality improvement initiative in a private Brazilian hospital.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- "Attitude is the fifth delay": perspectives of obstetric near-miss survivors and health care professionals on continuity and coordination of maternal care.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Article
- How cesarean section rates can be reduced through an effective financial strategy: A protocol for systematic review.Medicine · 2025Article
- How structured cultural changes can reduce cesarean section rate in a Danish tertiary hospital.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Global disparities in caesarean section rates: Why indication-based metrics are needed.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Educational interventions targeting pregnant women to optimise the use of caesarean section: What are the essential elements? A qualitative comparative analysis.BMC public health · 2023Article
- A bit of medical paternalism? A qualitative study on power relations between women and healthcare providers when deciding on mode of birth in five public maternity wards of Argentina.Reproductive health · 2023Article
- Conflicting attitudes between clinicians and women regarding maternal requested caesarean section: a qualitative evidence synthesis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWhen medically indicated, caesarean section can prevent deaths and other serious complications in mothers and babies. Lack of access to caesarean section may result in increased maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. However, rising caesarean section rates globally suggest overuse in healthy women and babies, with consequent iatrogenic damage for women and babies, and adverse impacts on the sustainability of maternity care provision. To date, interventions to ensure that caesarean section is appropriately used have not reversed the upward trend in rates. Qualitative evidence has the potential to explain why and how interventions may or may not work in specific contexts. We aimed to establish stakeholders' views on the barriers and facilitators to non-clinical interventions targeted at organizations, facilities and systems, to reduce unnecessary caesarean section.
methodsWe undertook a systematic qualitative evidence synthesis using a five-stage modified, meta-ethnography approach. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, EMBASE and grey literature databases (Global Index Medicus, POPLINE, AJOL) using pre-defined terms. Inclusion criteria were qualitative and mixed-method studies, investigating any non-clinical intervention to reduce caesarean section, in any setting and language, published after 1984. Study quality was assessed prior to data extraction. Interpretive thematic synthesis was undertaken using a barriers and facilitators lens. Confidence in the resulting Summaries of Findings was assessed using GRADE-CERQual.
results8,219 studies were identified. 25 studies were included, from 17 countries, published between 1993-2016, encompassing the views of over 1,565 stakeholders. Nineteen Summary of Findings statements were derived. They mapped onto three distinct themes: Health system, organizational and structural factors (6 SoFs); Human and cultural factors (7 SoFs); and Mechanisms of effect to achieve change factors (6 SoFs). The synthesis showed how inter- and intra-system power differentials, and stakeholder commitment, exert strong mechanisms of effect on caesarean section rates, independent of the theoretical efficacy of specific interventions to reduce them.
conclusionsNon-clinical interventions to reduce caesarean section are strongly mediated by organisational power differentials and stakeholder commitment. Barriers may be greatest where implementation plans contradict system and cultural norms. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42017059456.
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.