ArticlePloS one2022
Clinicians' views of factors influencing decision-making for CS for first-time mothers-A qualitative descriptive study.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Professionals' Attitudes to Maternal Request for Caesarean Birth: A Scoping Review.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2026Article
- Perspectives of obstetricians and midwives on the preference for caesarean deliveries: a qualitative exploration in Andhra Pradesh, India.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Addressing the Increasing Rate of Caesarean Sections in an Australian Healthcare System: A Systems Science Approach to Identify Stakeholder Perspectives.Nursing & health sciences · 2025Article
- Impact of physician, family and society on the choice of Cesarean-section delivery mode among Lebanese females.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2025Article
- The rising tide: Trends in induction of labor at term over a 5-year period at a single centre.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Observational
- Obstetric Outcomes by Hospital Volume of Operative Vaginal Delivery.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- The influence of emotional labor and emotional intelligence on cesarean section decision-making among midwives and obstetricians in Kosovo: A cross-sectional study using conjoint analysis.European journal of midwifery · 2025Article
- Navigating the choices of decision-making in cesarean sections: medical and personal perspectives from a qualitative study in Iraq.The Pan African medical journal · 2025Article
- How structured cultural changes can reduce cesarean section rate in a Danish tertiary hospital.PloS one · 2025Article
- How does hospital organisation influence the use of caesarean sections in low- and middle-income countries? A cross-sectional survey in Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand and Vietnam for the QUALI-DEC project.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Global increased cesarean section rates and public health implications: A call to action.Health science reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinicians' perspectives of the reasons for performing caesarean section (CS) are fundamental to deepening knowledge and understanding of factors influencing decision-making for CS. The aim of this study was to explore midwives' and obstetricians' views of factors influencing decision-making for CS for first-time mothers. A qualitative descriptive study with semi-structured one-to-one audio-recorded interviews was used to gather data from clinicians (15 midwives and 20 senior obstetricians). Following research ethics committee approval, clinicians, who were directly involved in the decision-making process for CS during the period of data collection, were purposively selected from three maternity units in the Republic of Ireland between June 2016 to July 2017. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Three interrelated themes with several subthemes reflective of clinicians' views and experiences emerged following data analysis. These were: 'A fear factor' describing clinicians' fear of adverse outcomes and subsequent litigation, 'Personal preferences versus a threshold-clinician driven factors emphasising the influence of clinicians' personal beliefs, and 'Standardised versus individualised care-a system perspective' explaining the effects of, or lack of, organisational policy and its direct and indirect impact on the decision-making process. Findings show that decisions to perform a CS are, on occasion, based on clinicians' personal beliefs and interpretation, similar to findings from other published literature. Consideration of broader issues related to organisational, socio-cultural and political context is essential when seeking solutions to the rising CS rates. The findings will enable clinicians to reflect on their day-to-day practice, in order to look for modifiable factors that influence their decision-making, and help women understand the multitude of factors that can lead to a decision to perform a CS. Findings will also contribute to the development of the 'next step action' and assist in devising future intervention studies to reduce any unnecessary CSs.
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.