ArticleMidwifery2021
Use of Cesarean Birth at Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital, Mizan Aman, Ethiopia.
Article in Midwifery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this analysis was to review indication and utilization of cesarean birth among Robson Classification of Cesarean Birth subgroups.
methodsThis study was a prospective hospital-based cross-sectional analysis of a convenience sample of 1,000 women who delivered Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital in the summer and fall of 2019.
resultsData on mode of delivery was available for 993 women, 23.4% of which underwent cesarean birth. The leading indication for cesarean birth was a fetal indication (46.2%), followed by a maternal indication (35.9%); elective cesarean birth was the indication for one cesarean birth. Robson Groups 1 and 3 (primary cesarean among nulliparous and multiparous women) accounted for the largest proportion of the overall population of women (30.2% and 36.8%), and cesarean birth rates within these groups were 19.4% and 16.1%, respectively. In all remaining groups, cesarean birth rates were at least 17.1%, ranging to as high as 100.0%. Pre-labor cesarean was highest in Robson Group 5 (multiparous women with a history of cesarean birth).
conclusionFurther analysis of risk factors associated with cesarean birth in women whose labor was induced or augmented, or those undergoing preterm birth, might offer additional target risk factors to modify.
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.