Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34731358›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2022

African American Women's Experiences with Birth After a Prior Cesarean Section.

Megan W Miller, Stephanie Baker

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Megan W MillerDepartment of Public Health Studies, Elon University, 100 Campus Drive, Elon, NC, 27244, USA. mmiller31@usf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0802-0949
Stephanie BakerDepartment of Public Health Studies, Elon University, 100 Campus Drive, Elon, NC, 27244, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWomen who have had a cesarean section (C-section) and become pregnant again may choose to have a planned repeat cesarean delivery (RCD) or vaginal birth after a cesarean (VBAC). This study aimed to characterize the pregnancy and birth experiences of African American (AA) women who had a successful VBAC, failed VBAC, or RCD.

methodsEligible participants (N = 25) self-identified as AA, had a C-section and a subsequent birth(s) in the past 12 years, and were educated past high school. Each participant was individually interviewed via phone call. The Sort and Sift, Think and Shift method was used to evaluate interview transcripts to minimize researcher bias and emphasize the voices of the participants.

resultsThe resulting themes included the impact of providers on pregnancy and childbirth satisfaction, the value of autonomy in maternal health decision-making, and the role that racism plays in AA women's birth experiences. Although some participants recalled a positive experience, the presence of limited autonomy, lack of support, and negative experiences with providers indicate that birth after a prior C-section for AA women can be improved.

conclusionsProviders should address their own racial biases and utilize the shared decision-making approach when their patients decide between a VBAC and RCD to improve patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionVaginal Birth after CesareanBlack or African AmericanFemaleHumansParturitionPregnancyAfrican American womenC-sectionMaternal healthRacial disparitiesVBAC

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.