ArticleReproductive health2024
Caesarean section on maternal request: a qualitative study of conflicts related to shared decision-making and person-centred care in Sweden.
Article in Reproductive health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nationwide cohort study reveals low bifidobacteria and distinct microbiota composition and function in Swedish newborns.Gut microbes · 2026Observational
- Women's motivations for and experiences with transabdominal cerclage: A qualitative study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Healthcare providers' perspectives on implementing evidence-based practice guidelines to reduce cesarean section rates: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Health Professionals' Attitudes to Maternal Request for Caesarean Birth: A Scoping Review.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2026Article
- The lasting effects of fear of childbirth: parous women's experiences of postponing or avoiding subsequent pregnancies.Reproductive health · 2026Article
- Could Escalated Caesarean Sections Be Viewed as Obstetric Mistreatment?Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2025Article
- Caesarean section on maternal request - a qualitative study of stakeholders´ views.Reproductive health · 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
- Informed Consent in Perinatal Care: Challenges and Best Practices in Obstetric and Midwifery-Led Models.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Review
- The struggle over caesarean section on maternal request: an ethical principles approach to Swedish media portrayal.Reproductive health · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundToday, person-centred care is seen as a cornerstone of health policy and practice, but accommodating individual patient preferences can be challenging, for example involving caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR). The aim of this study was to explore Swedish health professionals' perspectives on CSMR and analyse them with regard to potential conflicts that may arise from person-centred care, specifically in relation to shared decision-making.
methodsA qualitative study using both inductive and deductive content analysis was conducted based on semi-structured interviews. It was based on a purposeful sampling of 12 health professionals: seven obstetricians, three midwives and two neonatologists working at different hospitals in southern and central Sweden. The interviews were recorded either in a telephone call or in a video conference call, and audio files were deleted after transcription.
resultsIn the interviews, twelve types of expressions (sub-categories) of five types of conflicts (categories) between shared decision-making and CSMR emerged. Most health professionals agreed in principle that women have the right to decide over their own body, but did not believe this included the right to choose surgery without medical indications (patient autonomy). The health professionals also expressed that they had to consider not only the woman's current preferences and health but also her future health, which could be negatively impacted by a CSMR (treatment quality and patient safety). Furthermore, the health professionals did not consider costs in the individual decision, but thought CSMR might lead to crowding-out effects (avoiding treatments that harm others). Although the health professionals emphasised that every CSMR request was addressed individually, they referred to different strategies for avoiding arbitrariness (equality and non-discrimination). Lastly, they described that CSMR entailed a multifaceted decision being individual yet collective, and the use of birth contracts in order to increase a woman's sense of security (an uncomplicated decision-making process).
conclusionsThe complex landscape for handling CSMR in Sweden, arising from a restrictive approach centred on collective and standardised solutions alongside a simultaneous shift towards person-centred care and individual decision-making, was evident in the health professionals' reasoning. Although most health professionals emphasised that the mode of delivery is ultimately a professional decision, they still strived towards shared decision-making through information and support. Given the different views on CSMR, it is of utmost importance for healthcare professionals and women to reach a consensus on how to address this issue and to discuss what patient autonomy and shared decision-making mean in this specific context.
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.