ArticleCureus2026
Cesarean Section Rates Assessed Using the Robson Ten-Group Classification System: A Retrospective Observational Study in a Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRising cesarean section (CS) rates, especially in tertiary referral hospitals, necessitate standardised methods for meaningful evaluation. The Robson Ten-Group Classification System (TGCS) provides a straightforward and reproducible framework for analysing CS trends based on obstetric characteristics.
objectiveThis study aimed to audit CS rates in a tertiary care hospital of Eastern Uttar Pradesh using the Robson TGCS and to classify deliveries according to Robson groups while describing the relative size of each group and its contribution to the institutional CS rate. METHODOLOGY: This retrospective observational study included all deliveries conducted at the Government Medical College, Azamgarh, India, from August 2022 to July 2023 (n=954). Data were collected from the labour room and the operation theatre records. All women were classified into Robson's 10 groups, and descriptive analysis was performed to assess the overall CS rate and group-wise contribution. Proportions of CS and group-wise contributions were additionally reported with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for proportions to reflect the precision of the estimates. For each Robson group, percentages were clearly distinguished as (i) the relative size of the group, defined as the proportion of women in that group among all deliveries, and (ii) the contribution to the overall CS rate, defined as the proportion of CS attributable to that group among all CS deliveries.
resultThe overall CS rate was 61.1% (95% CI: 58.0-64.2), with 51.8% (95% CI: 48.1-55.5) emergency and 48.2% (95% CI: 44.5-51.9) elective procedures. Previous CS was the most common indication (24.7%). Robson Group 5 represented the largest contributor to the overall CS rate (32.4%; 95% CI: 29.4-35.4) while also forming one of the largest relative obstetric groups within the study population. Groups 1 and 2 constituted substantial relative group sizes, and each contributed 20.9% (95% CI: 18.3-23.5) to the overall CS rate. Group 10 accounted for 7.5% (95% CI: 5.9-9.1) of all CS, representing a smaller relative group size but a measurable contribution to the institutional CS burden. Maternal complications were minimal, and most neonates had normal birth weight.
conclusionThe Robson TGCS provides a structured approach for describing and monitoring CS distribution across obstetric groups in a tertiary care setting. Identification of major contributing groups may support institutional audits and inform future strategies aimed at optimising CS practices.
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.