ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2026
Racial and Ethnic Trends in Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of mode of delivery according to race and ethnicity in Brazil: Application of the Robson Classification.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Examining Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Low-Risk Cesarean Section Deliveries in the Colorado Healthy Start Study.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
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
objectiveTo evaluate race and ethnicity differences in rates of cesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR) in nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex presentation (NTSV) cesarean deliveries.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of NTSV cesarean deliveries within our institution from 2016 to 2020. The primary outcome was CDMR and the primary predictor was maternal race and ethnicity. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations between race and ethnicity, CDMR, and various maternal and perinatal factors.
resultsAmong 12,351 NTSV cesarean deliveries, 594 (4.81%) underwent CDMR; 4605 (37.28%) identified as non-Hispanic White, 3731 (30.21%) as Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 2840 (22.99%) as Hispanic, 785 (6.36%) as Black, and 390 (3.16%) as multiple races/American Indian/Alaskan Native. Adjusted models showed increased odds of CDMR among non-Hispanic White people. Multiple races/American Indian/Alaskan Native people had the lowest odds of CDMR compared to non-Hispanic White people (adjusted OR [aOR] = 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.82), followed by Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.72), Black (aOR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.89), and Hispanic (aOR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.55-0.88) people.
conclusionNon-Hispanic White people undergo CDMR more frequently compared to Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Black, and Hispanic people. Our findings are notable in light of the growing body of research demonstrating that White people have the lowest odds of cesarean delivery overall. SIGNIFICANCE: Profound racial disparities in maternal obstetric outcomes exist in the United States. It is well established that non-Hispanic Black people have disproportionately higher cesarean birth rates and higher rates of birth complications, including maternal death. Racial and ethnic differences in rates of primary elective cesarean delivery, or cesarean delivery on maternal request, are not well understood. This research shows that non-Hispanic White people have more cesarean deliveries on maternal request than other racial and ethnic groups among low-risk nulliparous patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39775743What 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.