ArticleHealth services research2025
Racial inequities in cesarean use among high- and low-risk deliveries: An analysis of childbirth hospitalizations in New Jersey from 2000 to 2015.
Article in Health services research, 2025. 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.
- Racial inequities in cesarean use among high- and low-risk deliveries: An analysis of childbirth hospitalizations in New Jersey from 2000 to 2015.Health services research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine racial inequities in low-risk and high-risk (or "medically appropriate") cesarean delivery rates in New Jersey during the era surrounding the United States cesarean surge and peak. STUDY SETTING AND
designThis retrospective repeated cross-sectional study examined the universe of childbirth hospitalizations in New Jersey from January 1, 2000 through September 30, 2015. We estimate the likelihood of cesarean delivery by maternal race and ethnicity, with mixed-level logistic regression models, stratified by cesarean risk level designated by the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM). DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE: We used all-payer hospital discharge data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Discharge Database and linked this data to the American Hospital Association Annual Survey. ZIP-code Tabulation Area (ZCTA)-level racialized economic segregation index data were from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey. We identified 1,604,976 statewide childbirth hospitalizations using International Classification of Diseases-9-CM (ICD-9) diagnosis and procedure codes and Diagnosis-Related Group codes, and created an indicator of cesarean delivery using ICD-9 codes. PRINCIPAL
findingsAmong low-risk deliveries, Black patients, particularly those in the age group of 35-39 years, had higher predicted probabilities of giving birth via cesarean than White people in the same age categories (Black-adjusted predicted probability = 24.0%; vs. White-adjusted predicted probability = 17.3%). Among high-risk deliveries, Black patients aged 35 to 39 years had a lower predicted probability (by 2.7 percentage points) of giving birth via cesarean compared with their White counterparts.
conclusionsThis study uncovered a lack of medically appropriate cesarean delivery for Black patients, with low-risk Black patients at higher odds of cesarean delivery and high-risk Black patients at lower odds of cesarean than their White counterparts. The significant Black-White inequities highlight the need to address misalignment of evidence-based cesarean delivery practice in the efforts to improve maternal health equity. Quality metrics that track whether cesareans are provided when medically needed may contribute to clinical and policy efforts to prevent disproportionate maternal morbidity and mortality among Black patients.
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.