ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
Exploring barriers and facilitators of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC), awareness, and preferences among females in Western Saudi Arabia.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Scars of birth: caesarean delivery and fertility intentions among women of reproductive age in sub-Saharan Africa.Reproductive health · 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
Background: Women with a history of previous Cesarean Sections (CS) are faced with two choices during their pregnancy: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) or Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery (ERCD). VBAC refers to vaginal delivery in women who have previously undergone a CS. Objectives: Despite limited studies on VBAC in Saudi Arabia, this research aims to assess the knowledge and awareness of Saudi women regarding VBAC. Methodology: This cross-sectional study was conducted among adult females in Western Saudi Arabia utilizing a convenient snowball sampling technique. The total number of participants was 901 females. The participants completed a self-administered questionnaire, which covered general information, knowledge about VBAC, and factors influencing their decision. Statistical analysis employed Chi-squared, Independent T-Test, and ANOVA. Results: Our findings revealed that 67.5% of participants had inadequate knowledge about VBAC. Only 45.6% of participants were familiar with the term VBAC. The primary reason for choosing CS over VBAC was medical necessity, as reported by 36.3% of participants. The most common reasons for rejecting VBAC were fear for their child's safety and the fact that a CS was recommended, both reported by 35.1%. The lowest reported reason was external interference from family or spouses, at 10.5%. Conclusion: Although the majority of our sample consisted of highly educated women, most exhibited poor knowledge regarding VBAC. Therefore, raising awareness about VBAC, especially through healthcare professionals and their clinics, is essential.
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.