ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2026
Cesarean delivery on maternal request and Robson classification.
Article in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07549971 (Trial of Labor After Cesarean), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Trial of Labor After Cesarean
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 describe the types of cesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR), and to analyze the distribution of delivering types according to the Robson Classification (RC) and the distribution of comorbidities among the different groups of delivering types.
methodsCross-sectional study using electronic records of deliveries that occurred in a public, academic high-risk maternity hospital in Brazil, from October 2017 to October 2021. CDMR included first or second cesarean delivery (CD), subdived into three groups: elective (CDMRele), induction withdrawal (CDMRiw), and labor withdrawal (CDMRlw).
resultsIn 7779 deliveries, 53.1% (4132) were CD. The CDMR group corresponded to 10.2% (420/4132) of all CD and 5.4% (420/7779) of all deliveries. CDMRele were the main group (246 - 58.6%), followed by CDMRiw (118 - 28.1%), and CDMRlw (56 - 13.3%). The CDMR and its subdivisions were concentrated in RC group 5.1 (CDMR 240 - 57.1%, CDMRele 156 - 63.4%, CDMRiw 54 - 45.7% and CDMRlw 30 - 53.6%). Second CD corresponded to 3.1% (247/7779) of all deliveries and 58.8% (247/420) of CDRM. Among CDMR, 72.1% (303/420) of patients had comorbidities and the most frequent diseases were hypertension and diabetes.
conclusionThe definition of CDRM in the international literature is not a consensus and Brazil's law supports CDMR in circumstances not previously described. The RC is limited for understanding the growing phenomenon of CDMR among a group of pregnant women with high prevalence of comorbidities.
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.