ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2020
A prospective study of a new prediction model of vaginal birth after cesarean section at a tertiary care centre.
Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Models for predicting vaginal birth after cesarean section: scoping review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Factors associated with successful vaginal birth after one lower uterine transverse cesarean section delivery.Scientific reports · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo create a new and simple model for predicting the likelihood of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) section using variables available at the time of admission. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective observational study was performed at a tertiary care centre in Haryana over a period of 12 months (January 2018 - December 2018) in pregnant women attending the labour room with one previous cesarean section fulfilling the criteria for undergoing trial of labour after cesarean (TOLAC). The sample size was 150. A VBAC score was calculated for each patient using a new prediction model that included variables available at the time of admission such as maternal age, gestational age, Bishop's score, body mass index, indication for primary cesarean section, and clinically estimated fetal weight. The results of the VBAC scores were correlated with outcomes i.e. successful VBAC or failed VBAC. The chi-square test and Student's t-test was used for comparison among the groups. Descriptive and regression analysis was performed for the study variables.
resultsOut of 150 TOLAC cases, 78% had successful VBAC and the remainder (22%) had failed VBAC. The observed probability of having a successful VBAC for a VBAC score of 0-3 was 34%, 4-6 was 68%, 7-9 was 90%, and ≥10 was 97%. The prediction model performed well with an area under the curve of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.68 to 0.85) of the receiver operating characteristics receiver operating characteristic curve.
conclusionThe present study shows that the proposed VBAC prediction model is a good tool to predict the outcome of TOLAC and can be used to counsel women regarding the mode of delivery in the current and subsequent pregnancies. Further studies of this model and other such models with different permutations and combinations of variables are required.
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.