Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42216876›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2026

A cross-sectional study of caesarean deliveries performed by medical doctors and associate clinicians in nine district and regional hospitals in Sierra Leone using the Robson Ten Group Classification System.

Josien Westendorp, Rugiatu Jalloh, Sarrah Sheriff, Jenny Wussow, Guro Stamland, Sigrid-Anne Bjorøy, Francis Moses, Marcus J Rijken, Risa Hoffmann-Lonnee, Håkon A Bolkan and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Josien WestendorpInstitute of Public Health and Nursing, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9151-5584
Rugiatu JallohCollege of Medicine and Allied Health Sciences, University of Sierra Leone, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Sarrah SheriffMasanga Medical Research Unit, Masanga, Sierra Leone.
Jenny WussowGlobal Health Section, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4575-5277
Guro StamlandFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Sigrid-Anne BjorøyFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Francis MosesGovernment of Sierra Leone: Ministry of Health, Director of Reproductive Health, Freetown, Western Area, Sierra Leone.
Marcus J RijkenThe Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0914-5508
Risa Hoffmann-LonneeInstitute of Public Health and Nursing, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7851-5376
Håkon A BolkanInstitute of Public Health and Nursing, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9609-4093
Alex J van DuinenInstitute of Public Health and Nursing, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6943-0100

Funding

Laerdal Foundation for Acute Medicine 40495Liaison Committee between the Central Norway Regional Health Authority and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology 90531700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMaternal and neonatal mortality remain high in Sierra Leone despite significant decline in the last decade. The aim of the present study was to evaluate obstetric care delivery using the Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS), focusing on caesarean delivery (CD) and task-sharing.

methodsThis cross-sectional study analyzed maternity and surgical registry data from nine governmental hospitals, collected over 4 months in 2021 or 2022. Variables included mode and outcome of delivery, TGCS parameters, and provider cadre: associate clinician (AC) or medical doctor (MD).

resultsOf 5748 women included in the study, 3806 (66.2%) delivered vaginally, 156 (2.7%) by assisted vaginal delivery and 1786 (31.1%) by CD. The largest TGCS groups were low risk primipara (28.8%) and multipara (47.0%). In the low risk primipara group, 450/1656 (27.2%) underwent CD; in the low risk multipara group, 604/2702 (22.4%) underwent CD. MDs performed 876 (49.1%) of the total CDs and ACs 830 (46.5%). ACs performed more CDs with the indication of twin pregnancy, previous CD, or malpresentation, whereas MDs performed more with the indication of breech, uterine rupture, and fetal distress.

conclusionFacility-based CD rates in Sierra Leone are high, particularly among low risk primi- and multipara-Robson groups, while assisted vaginal delivery rates remain low. Nearly half of all CDs are performed by ACs, highlighting the importance of task-sharing in this context. Further in-depth analysis is warranted to understand the factors influencing CD decision making and the collaborative processes between ACs and MDs to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHospitals, DistrictHumansInfant, NewbornParityPhysiciansPregnancySierra LeoneTask Shiftingcaesarean deliveriesperinatal mortalityRobson Ten Group Classification SystemSierra Leonetask‐sharing

Identifiers

PMID42216876
PMCPMC13674845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.