Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35633052›Full record

SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2022

Term breech presentation-Intended cesarean section versus intended vaginal delivery-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Julia Wängberg Nordborg, Therese Svanberg, Annika Strandell, Ylva Carlsson

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Breech Presentation: Delivery Management and Future Perspectives.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A qualitative and quantitative cross-sectional study on the past, present, and future of vaginal delivery: Turkey.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Breech birth care: Number 1 - 2024.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julia Wängberg NordborgDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0344-7604
Therese SvanbergHTA-centrum, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Annika StrandellDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-1647-5388
Ylva CarlssonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1414-7279
Sahlgrenska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThree per cent of all infants are born in breech presentation, still the preferred way to deliver them remains controversial. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the safety for the mother and child depending on intended mode of delivery when the baby is in breech position at term. MATERIAL AND

methodsThe population (P) was pregnant women with a child in breech presentation, from gestational week 34

resultsThirty-two articles were included (with 530 604 women). The certainty of evidence was moderate or low because the study designs were mostly retrospective cohort studies. The only randomized trial showed reduced risk of perinatal mortality for planned cesarean section, risk ratio (RR) 0.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08-0.97, 2078 women, low certainty of evidence), stillbirths excluded. A meta-analysis of cohort studies resulted in a similar estimate, RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.25-0.51, 21 studies, 388 714 women, low certainty of evidence). We also found reduced risk for outcomes representing perinatal morbidity 0-28 days: 5-min Apgar score less than 7 in one randomized controlled trial: RR 0.27 (95% CI 0.12-0.58, 2033 women, moderate certainty of evidence), and in a meta-analysis: RR 0.1 (95% CI 0.14-0.26, 18 studies, 217 024 women, moderate certainty of evidence); APGAR score less than 4 at 5 min: RR 0.39 (95% CI 0.19-0.81, five studies, 44 498 women, low certainty of evidence); and pH less than 7.0: RR 0.23 (95% CI 0.12-0.43, four studies, 13 440 women, low certainty of evidence). Outcomes for the mother were similar in the groups except for reduced risk for experience of urinary incontinence in the group of planned cesarean section: RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.41-0.93, one study, 1940 women, low certainty of evidence). The conversion rate from planned vaginal delivery to emergency cesarean section ranged from 16% to 51% (median 41.8%, 10 studies, 50 763 women, moderate certainty of evidence).

conclusionsIntended cesarean section may reduce the risk of perinatal mortality and perinatal as well as some maternal morbidity compared with intended vaginal delivery. It is uncertain whether there is any difference in maternal mortality. The conversion rate from intended vaginal delivery to emergency cesarean section is high.

Indexed as

Breech PresentationDelivery, ObstetricPerinatal DeathApgar ScoreCesarean SectionFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective Studiesbreech presentationcesarean sectionmode of deliverymorbidityperinatal mortalityterm birthvaginal delivery

Identifiers

PMID35633052
PMCPMC9564601
OpenAlexW4281713623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.