Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36921720›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM2023

Racial bias in cesarean decision-making.

Sara E Edwards, Quetzal A Class, Catherine E Ford, Tamika A Alexander, Jonah D Fleisher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM, 2023. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Artificial intelligence in gynecologic and obstetric emergencies.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Sara E EdwardsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago, IL. Electronic address: sedwar24@uic.edu.
Quetzal A ClassDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Catherine E FordDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Tamika A AlexanderDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago, IL.
Jonah D FleisherDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago, IL.

Funding

Strengthening Stakeholder Engagement in Human Research Protections.UL1TR002003 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI KARNIK, NIRANJAN SUBHASH, MERMELSTEIN, ROBIN J. · 2016 to 2024
$33.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCategory II fetal heart tracing noted during continuous external fetal monitoring is a frequent indication for cesarean delivery in the United States despite its somewhat subjective interpretation. Black patients have higher rates of cesarean delivery and higher rates for this indication. Racial bias in clinical decision-making has been demonstrated throughout medicine, including in obstetrics.

objectiveWe sought to examine if racial bias affects providers' decisions about cesarean delivery for an indication of category II fetal heart tracings. STUDY

designWe constructed an online survey study consisting of 2 clinical scenarios of patients in labor with category II tracings. Patient race was randomized to Black and White; the vignettes were otherwise identical. Participants had the option to continue with labor or to proceed with a cesarean delivery at 3 decision points in each scenario. Participants reported their own demographics anonymously. This survey was distributed to obstetrical providers via email, listserv, and social media. Data were analyzed using chi-square tests at each decision point in the overall sample and in subgroup analyses by various participant demographics.

resultsA total of 726 participants contributed to the study. We did not find significant racial bias in cesarean delivery decision-making overall. However, in a scenario of a patient with a previous cesarean delivery, Fisher's exact tests showed that providers <40 years old (n=322; P=.01) and those with <10 years of experience (n=239; P=.050) opted for a cesarean delivery for Black patients more frequently than for White patients at the first decision point. As labor progressed in this scenario, the rates of cesarean delivery equalized across patient race.

conclusionYounger providers and those with fewer years of clinical experience demonstrated racial bias in cesarean delivery decision-making at the first decision point early in labor. Providers did not show racial bias as labor progressed, nor in the scenario with a patient without a previous cesarean delivery. This bias may be the consequence of provider training with the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Unit Network Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Calculator, developed in 2007, and widely used to estimate the probability of successful vaginal birth after a cesarean delivery. This calculator used race as a predictive factor until it was removed in June 2021. Future studies should investigate if this bias persists following this change, while also focusing on interventions to address these findings.

Indexed as

Labor, ObstetricObstetricsRacismVaginal Birth after CesareanBlack or African AmericanCesarean SectionClinical Decision-MakingFemaleHumansPregnancyUnited StatesWhitecategory IIcesarean deliveryclinical decision-makingimplicit biaslabornonreassuringracial biastrial of labor after cesareanvaginal birth after cesarean

Identifiers

PMID36921720
PMCPMC10121892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.