ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023
Direct standardization method according to Robson classification for comparison of cesarean rates.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fostering Excellence in Obstetrical Surgery.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCompare cesarean section rates between populations or within a population over time using the crude measure is biased mainly due to differences in the characteristics of the obstetric population. The Robson Ten Group Classification (RTGC) is being widely used all over the world based on a few basic obstetrics variables.
objectivesPropose a method of direct standardization according to RTGC to make the overall rates of cesarean sections comparable between different populations or within the same population over time.
methodsWe used data from the WHO Global Maternal and Perinatal Health Survey (WHOGS) conducted between 2004 and 2008 and data from the WHO Multinational Survey on Maternal and Neonatal Health (WHOMCS) conducted between 2010 and 2011, covering information from obstetric population of 21 countries. The standard population was based in the average size of Robson Groups in WHOMCS. The crude and standardized rates, their differences intra and inter populations, and its respective confidence intervals were calculated.
resultsThe impact and importance of the method were demonstrated. The five leading countries list on cesarean rates was completely modified and changes of cesarean rates over time in the same country varied in both directions by the standardization.
conclusionThis method is useful to compare overall rates as an additional information when RTGC Report Table is been used or, for some type of studies as analytical ecologic studies with multiple groups, where leading with the report tables are laborious and hard to interpret. The use of Robson Ten Group Classification for direct standardization of cesarean rates is easy to apply and interpret.
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.