Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36201407›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Prediction of odds for emergency cesarean section: A secondary analysis of the CHILD term birth cohort study.

Mon H Tun, Radha Chari, Padma Kaul, Fabiana V Mamede, Mike Paulden, Diana L Lefebvre, Stuart E Turvey, Theo J Moraes, Malcolm R Sears, Padmaja Subbarao and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Early versus late amniotomy during twin labor.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mon H TunDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5428-4825
Radha ChariDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Padma KaulCanadian VIGOUR Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Fabiana V MamedeDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Mike PauldenSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Diana L LefebvreDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Stuart E TurveyDepartment of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Theo J MoraesDepartment of Pediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Malcolm R SearsDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Padmaja SubbaraoDepartment of Pediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Piush J MandhaneDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
University of Alberta · CAMcMaster University · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPreviously developed cesarean section (CS) and emergency CS prediction tools use antenatal and intrapartum risk factors. We aimed to develop a predictive model for the risk of emergency CS before the onset of labour utilizing antenatal obstetric and non-obstetric factors.

methodsWe completed a secondary analysis of data collected from the CHILD Cohort Study. The analysis was limited to term (≥37 weeks), singleton pregnant women with cephalic presentation. The sample was divided into a training and validation dataset. The emergency CS prediction model was developed in the training dataset and the performance accuracy was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve(AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC). Our final model was subsequently evaluated in the validation dataset.

resultsThe participant sample consisted of 2,836 pregnant women. Mean age of participants was 32 years, mean BMI of 25.4 kg/m2 and 39% were nulliparous. 14% had emergency CS delivery. Each year of increasing maternal age increased the odds of emergency CS by 6% (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR 1.06,1.02-1.08). Likewise, there was a 4% increase odds of emergency CS for each unit increase in BMI (aOR 1.04,1.02-1.06). In contrast, increase in maternal height has a negative association with emergency CS. The final emergency CS delivery predictive model included six variables (hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, antenatal depression, previous vaginal delivery, age, height, BMI). The AUC for our final prediction model was 0.74 (0.72-0.77) in the training set with a similar AUC in the validation dataset (0.77; 0.71-0.82).

conclusionThe developed and validated emergency CS delivery prediction model can be used in counselling prospective parents around their CS risk and healthcare resource planning. Further validation of the tool is suggested.

Indexed as

Birth CohortCesarean SectionAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaternal AgePregnancyProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36201407
PMCPMC9536615
OpenAlexW4302761388

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.