ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care
Outcome of the vaginal birth after cesarean section during the second birth order in West Kazakhstan.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcome of trial of labour after one previous cesarean section at Federal Medical Centre, Bida, north central, Nigeria.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2025Article
- Predictors of successful trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) in women with one prior transverse cesarean section at Tertiary Hospitals in northwest Ethiopia: a multicenter study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Routine haemoglobin assay after uncomplicated caesarean sections.Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review · 2021Article
- The Failure Rate, Related Factors, and Neonate Complications of Vaginal Delivery after Cesarean Section.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) increases the chance of subsequent vaginal deliveries and reduces the repeat cesarean section (CS) rate with subsequent postoperative morbidity.
objectivesTo detect the outcome of VBAC during the second birth order in Aktobe region of West Kazakhstan. PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 832 women eligible for trial of VBAC were included in this study. Women who signed the consent of VBAC were evaluated thoroughly and data such as maternal age, body mass index, height, gestational age at admission, indication of the previous CS, estimated fetal weight, engagement of the fetal head, condition of the membranes, and cervical dilatation were collected. Data collected after delivery include duration from active phase of labor, mode of delivery, fetal, and neonatal outcomes. The collected data analyzed to detect the outcome of trial of VBAC during the second birth order in Aktobe region of West Kazakhstan.
resultsLogistic analysis and odds ratio (OR) showed that body mass index (BMI) ≤25 kg/m
conclusionVBAC is safe in properly selected cases. BMI ≤25 kg/m
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.