ArticleRevista brasileira de enfermagem2024
Trends in cesarean section rates in Brazil by Robson classification group, 2014-2020.
Article in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Associated With the Continuation of Breastfeeding Beyond 12 Months of Age in Brazilian Families.Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025Article
- Recent temporal trends in cesarean section rates in Brazil according to the Robson classification system.Cadernos de saude publica · 2025Article
- COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on the Birth Weight of Children Born in a Brazilian Metropolis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Cesarean section rates in Lucas do Rio Verde, Brazil: Assessing the impact of socioeconomic status and maternal and neonatal outcomes.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto evaluate the trends in cesarean sections from 2014 to 2020 across both public and private sectors, utilizing the Robson Classification.
methodsthis time series study analyzed the proportion of women who underwent cesarean sections between 2014 and 2020, considering both the Robson classification and the type of healthcare service. Trend analysis was conducted using the Prais-Winsten regression.
resultshigher proportions of cesarean sections were observed in all Robson groups within the private sector compared to the public sector. This was despite a decreasing trend in the private sector and an increasing trend in the public sector. Notably, elevated proportions of cesarean sections were recorded in groups that are typically favorable to normal childbirth (Robson 1, 4, and 5).
conclusionsalthough there was a decreasing trend in cesarean sections within the private sector, an increasing trend was observed in the public sector. Additionally, there was a high proportion of cesarean sections among women with conditions favorable to normal childbirth. It is crucial to continuously monitor these indicators to evaluate and implement interventions aimed at reducing unnecessary cesarean sections.
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.