ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
A cross-sectional analysis of caesarean sections according to Robson 10-group classification system: experience from a tertiary centre in Turkiye.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. 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.
- Arterial and Venous Doppler Parameters in Fetal Growth Restriction: A Comparative Evaluation of Early- and Late-Onset Subtypes.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prevalence, indications, and preference of caesarean section deliveries among women attending primary health care units in Port-Said City, Egypt.The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association · 2026Article
- Analysis of caesarean section rates according to the Robson classification system and indications for caesarean delivery: experience from a tertiary health centre in Turkey.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Observational
- Prevalence and Contributors to Caesarean Section Rates at Maternity and Children's Hospital, Qassim, Based on Robson Groups.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlobally, including in Turkiye, increasing caesarean section (CS) rates are a crucial public health concern. The Robson 10-group classification system, which is based on obstetric features, is the global standard for monitoring, evaluating, and comparing CS rates in various healthcare settings. Documenting CS rates in tertiary referral centre using the Robson 10-group classification system was the goal of this study.
methodsThis retrospective study was conducted on women with deliveries over four years, from June 1, 2020, to October 1, 2024, and categorised according to the Robson 10-group classification system. For pairwise comparisons, numerical and nominal variables were analysed with independent t-test and Pearson's chi-squared test, respectively. A p-value of less than 0,05 was accepted as statistically significant. All variables were expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsA total of 63.809 deliveries were eligible for analysis. The overall CS rate was 54,2%, with variations across different years. The rates ranged from 42,2% in 2020 to 59,9% in 2024. Turkish cases showed a higher rate of CS at 56,2%, compared to 49,6% for refugees. Group 5 was the largest contributor among these groups in terms of (23,9%) CSs, followed by corresponding contributions, Group 10 with 7,7%, and Group 2 with 6,0%.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that the overall caesarean section rate was 54,2%, with Group 5 being the primary contributor, followed by Groups 10, 2, and 1.
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.