ArticleAmerican journal of public health1993
Variation in cesarean section rates among hospitals in Washington State.
Article in American journal of public health, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Caesarean section in uninsured women in the USA: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Impact of Provider Competition under Global Budgeting on the Use of Cesarean Delivery.Health services research · 2018Article
- Adoption of diagnostic technology and variation in caesarean section rates: a test of the practice style hypothesis in Norway.Health services research · 2012Article
- Mind the information gap: fertility rate and use of cesarean delivery and tocolytic hospitalizations in Taiwan.Health economics review · 2011Article
- Cesarean delivery among nulliparous women in Beirut: assessing predictors in nine hospitals.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2007Article
- Inter-hospital variations in caesarean sections. A risk adjusted comparison in the Valencia public hospitals.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2000Article
- A regional evaluation of variation in low-severity hospital admissions.Journal of general internal medicine · 1997Article
- Interspecialty differences in the obstetric care of low-risk women.American journal of public health · 1997Article
- Caesarean section rates in South Africa: evidence of bias among different 'population groups'.Ethnicity & healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study examined hospital characteristics and hospital population risk factors and their associations with hospital-specific cesarean section rates in Washington State.
methodsData were obtained from 1987 birth certificates. The study population included all hospitals that had 12 or more singleton live births.
resultsHospital-specific cesarean section rates varied from 0% to 43% and were positively associated with proprietary ownership, size of delivery service, and the proportions of women who had complications or high-birthweight infants. The proportion of women who had late prenatal care was inversely associated with cesarean section rates. Although proprietary hospitals had higher cesarean section rates, their patient populations were lower risk than patients of public or teaching hospitals.
conclusionsVariation in cesarean section rates among hospitals cannot be fully explained by either hospital or patient population characteristics. A combined strategy may be necessary to lower unjustifiably high cesarean section rates.
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.