Observational studyInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2022
Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.
Observational study in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04847336 (IMAGINE EURO), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
IMAGINE EURO (Improving MAternal Newborn carE In the EURO Region): Maternal and Newborn Health Service Preparedness, Quality and Resilience, Among Countries of the WHO European Region, During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health workers' perspectives on the quality of maternal and newborn health care around the time of childbirth: Results of the Improving MAternal Newborn carE in the EURO Region (IMAgiNE EURO) project in 12 countries of the World Health Organization European Region.Journal of global health · 2024Trial
- The Association Between Women's Perception of Birth During the Pandemic, Companion of Choice and Support From Health Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Study in 20 Countries in the WHO European Region.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2025Article
- Trends in the quality of maternal and neonatal care in Sweden and Norway as compared to 12 WHO European countries: A cross-sectional survey investigating maternal perspectives during the COVID-19 pandemic.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Observational
- Women's experiences of disrespect and abuse in Swiss facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative analysis of an open-ended question in the IMAgiNE EURO study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Quality of maternal and newborn care in Switzerland during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study based on WHO quality standards.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022Article
- Women's assessment of the quality of hospital-based perinatal care by mode of birth in Romania during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the IMAgiNE EURO study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022Observational
- Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
36 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic by facility type among 16 European countries, comparing rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean.
methodsWomen who gave birth in the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020, to February 7, 2022, answered a validated online questionnaire. Rates of instrumental birth, instrumental vaginal birth, and cesarean, and a QMNC index were calculated for births in public versus private facilities.
resultsResponses from 25 206 participants were analyzed. Women giving birth in private compared with public facilities reported significantly more frequent total cesarean (32.5% vs 19.0%; aOR 1.70; 95% CI 1.52-1.90), elective cesarean (17.3% vs 7.8%; aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.65-2.19), and emergency cesarean before labor (7.4% vs 3.9%; aOR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.70) (P < 0.001 for all comparisons), with analyses by country confirming these results. QMNC index results were heterogeneous across countries and regions in the same country and were largely affected by geographical distribution of regions rather than by type of facility alone.
conclusionThe study confirms that births in private facilities have higher odds of cesarean. It also suggests that QMNC should be closely monitored in all facilities to achieve high-quality care, independent of facility type or geographical distribution. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04847336.
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.