ArticleAfrican health sciences2022
Determinants of the decision to incision interval in case of emergency caesarean section in Yaoundé' hospitals.
Article in African health sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision to delivery interval for emergency cesarean section and associated factors in africa: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2025Pooled it
- Spatial disparities and determinants of obstetric fistula among childbearing women in sub-Saharan Africa: A geospatial regression approach.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Impact of 'decision-to-delivery' interval on maternal and perinatal outcomes: a retrospective study of emergency caesarean section from 2017 to 2021 at a secondary health facility in Nigeria.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Editorial.African health sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the determinants of the decision to incision interval in case of emergency caesarean section in Yaoundé' hospitals. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional (affected / non-affected) study was conducted in four hospitals in Yaoundé between January and may 2017 after National Ethical Committee approval. The target population was women who benefited from emergency caesarean section during the study period. Crude Odds Ratio (OR) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% Confidence Interval was used to appreciate the association between several characteristics and the risk for long decision-incision delay. Results: The overall cases of 165 emergency caesarean section were analyzed. The prevalence of emergency caesarean section performed within 30 minutes was 20%. Social factors associated with long delay to perform the emergency Caesarean section (> 30 minutes) were the primary level of education [ AOR: 3.63(2.44-5.41)], unemployment status [AOR: 5.17(2.95-8.95)]; and the absence of a parent at admission [AOR: 2.2(1.23-3.94)]. Medical factors associated with long delay from decision to incision were: use of spinal anesthesia in opposition to general anesthesia [AOR: 3.86(2.59-5.73)]; delay of transfer from emergency and the late provision of the operation supplies [AOR: 4.18(2.90-6.03)]. Conclusion: Few women benefit from the surgical intervention within a maximum of 30 minutes. Support measures for women presenting the indications for emergency caesarean sections in hospitals are essential to improve the decision-incision delay of the caesarean section emergency.
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.