ArticlePloS one2022
Changes in cesarean section rates after introduction of a punitive financial policy in Georgia: A population-based registry study 2017-2019.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Financial and regulatory interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections: An updated scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of Government-Led Free Caesarean Section Policies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries from 2009 to 2025.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Quality of registration of antenatal, intrapartum, and newborn information in the Georgian birth registry.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is little research on how financial incentives and penalties impact national cesarean section rates. In January 2018, Georgia introduced a national cesarean section reduction policy, which imposes a financial penalty on hospitals that do not meet their reduction targets. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of this policy on cesarean section rates, subgroups of women, and selected perinatal outcomes.
methodsWe included women who gave birth from 2017 to 2019 registered in the Georgian Birth Registry (n = 150 534, nearly 100% of all births in the country during this time). We then divided the time period into pre-policy (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017) and post-policy (January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019). An interrupted time series analysis was used to compare the cesarean section rates (both overall and stratified by parity), neonatal intensive care unit transfer rates, and perinatal mortality rates in the two time periods. Descriptive statistics were used to assess differences in maternal socio-demographic characteristics.
resultsThe mean cesarean section rate in Georgia decreased from 44.7% in the pre-policy period to 40.8% in the post-policy period, mainly among primiparous women. The largest decrease in cesarean section births was found among women <25 years of age and those with higher education. There were no significant differences in the neonatal intensive care unit transfer rate or the perinatal mortality rate between vaginal and cesarean section births in the post-policy period.
conclusionThe cesarean section rate in Georgia decreased during the 2-year post-policy period. The reduction mainly took place among primiparous women. The policy had no impact on the neonatal intensive care unit transfer rate or the perinatal mortality rate. The impact of the national cesarean section reduction policy on other outcomes is not known.
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.