Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34816877›Full record

ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2021

Cesarean childbirth: an institutional socio-clinical study of the professional practices and discourses.

Simone Santana da Silva, Cinira Magali Fortuna, Gilles Monceau

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Simone Santana da SilvaUniversidade do Estado da Bahia, Campus VII, Senhor do Bonfim, Bahia, BA, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0768-3217
Cinira Magali FortunaUniversidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, PAHO/WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2808-6806
Gilles MonceauUniversité de Cergy-Pontoise, Gennevilliers, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2835-3575

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveto analyze how the social, historical, economic and professional elements influence the institutionalization process of cesarean childbirth in Brazil and France.

methoda qualitative study grounded on the theoretical framework of the institutional socioclinic. The data were produced through focus groups and individual interviews, supported by semi-structured scripts, with health professionals, mothers and fathers and a research diary. The study had 83 participants. The analysis was based on the theoretical framework and thematic analysis. Cross analysis was developed between the different types of data, services and groups, as well as between countries.

resultsthe participants were characterized in terms of schooling, employment, level of training and workplace. The countries researched have their own peculiar health and educational structure and are marked by a social-historical-economic construction outlined by patriarchy. The New Public Management influences both contexts and makes health care precarious. The technical and organizational dimensions reinforce an intellectual and social division of work and knowledge in health.

conclusionthe institutionalization process of childbirth in the countries is marked by social, economic and professional aspects. Practices and speeches of the professionals in their work process influence the occurrence, or not, of cesarean sections.

Indexed as

Delivery, ObstetricHealth FacilitiesCesarean SectionFemaleHumansParturitionPregnancyProfessional PracticeQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID34816877
PMCPMC8616173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.