SynthesisBirth (Berkeley, Calif.)2026
Prevalence of Episiotomy Practice and Associated Factors in Brazil: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Birth (Berkeley, Calif.), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough routine episiotomy is not recommended, it remains widely performed during childbirth, with rates varying substantially across countries. This systematic review synthesizes evidence on the prevalence and associated factors of episiotomy in Brazil.
methodsThis is a systematic review of prevalence, conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the identification number CRD42024621526. Seven electronic databases were searched with no restrictions regarding publication period or language: MEDLINE/PubMed (via the National Library of Medicine), Web of Science, SCOPUS, CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane, EMBASE (Elsevier), and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS). The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data was used by two authors to assess the quality of the selected studies.
resultsA total of 65 studies were included. The prevalence of episiotomy practice among women varied from 0.5% to 94%. Only 16 studies (24.6%) reported episiotomy rates close to the recommended benchmark of 10%. Thirty-three studies (50.8%) analyzed factors associated with the practice, with the most frequently reported factors being: primiparity, primigravidity, nulliparity, adolescence, youth, higher education, higher income, delivery in private healthcare settings, physician-assisted births, use of oxytocin, instrumental delivery, absence of previous vaginal birth, prematurity, newborn weight over 4000 g, and horizontal delivery position.
conclusionsA limited number of studies have met recommended episiotomy rates, underscoring the challenge of translating evidence into practice. Lower rates were seen in births attended by nurse midwives. Continuous professional training focused on evidence-based care is essential to reduce unnecessary interventions and align rates with recommended targets.
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.