ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2025
Caesarean section for stillborn babies, Benin, Malawi, Uganda and United Republic of Tanzania.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 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.
- A multi-faceted hospital-based intervention for intrapartum care in sub-Saharan Africa: a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial.Nature medicine · 2026Trial
- Prediction of low 5-minute Apgar scores: development and internal validation of parity-stratified clinical prediction models for sub-Saharan Africa.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To understand why caesarean sections are performed for stillborn babies by investigating caesarean section rates and indications in sub-Saharan African countries and to examine whether fetal vital status at admission is associated with caesarean section. Methods: The study involved registry data on 105 872 babies weighing 1000 g or more born to women aged 13 to 50 years at 16 hospitals in Benin, Malawi, Uganda and United Republic of Tanzania between 1 July 2021 and 30 June 2023. We assessed caesarean section rates and indications, and used multivariable logistic regression analyses to estimate associations between fetal heartbeat at admission and caesarean section, by birth outcome. Findings: The caesarean section rate was 28.0% (29 640/105 872) overall, 40.9% (858/2098) for intrapartum stillbirths and 19.0% (322/1694) for antepartum stillbirths. Previous caesarean section was among the top three indications across birth outcomes. Information on fetal heartbeat at admission was unavailable for 24.7% (7312/29 640) of caesarean section births. Multivariable analysis showed that the odds of a caesarean section was significantly higher when fetal heartbeat was not reported compared with the detection of a heartbeat among both antepartum (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 2.55; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.53-4.26) and intrapartum (aOR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.51-2.87) stillbirths. Conclusion: Unknown fetal heartbeat at admission was associated with a higher odds of caesarean section, possibly due to attempts to provide optimum care given diagnostic uncertainty. Decision-making processes on the mode of birth need to be better understood and feasible fetal monitoring recommendations are required for low-resource settings.
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.