Cited by 79Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsReproductive Health and ContraceptionMaternal and fetal healthcare

Rising cesarean rates: Are patients sicker?

Bailit, Jennifer L., Love, Thomas E., Mercer, Brian·2004·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective Our study explored if patient risk factors for cesarean delivery (CD) are changing over time.Study design North Carolina birth certificates from 1995 were used to build a logistic regression model to predict the probability of primary CD. The model estimated each patient's probability of primary CD for 4 years of deliveries (397,793). The percentage of the population in each of the 10 CD risk deciles were compared across years.Results The incidence of primary CD rose from 16.6 to 18.4 (P<.0001). Despite this increase over time, more women were low risk (probability of CD <10%) (43.2% to 46.4%, P<.0001). The cesarean rate even rose for women in the lowest risk group (4.6% to 5.9%, P<.0001).Conclusion The rate of primary CD is increasing, despite improvements in patient risk profile. The increasing CD rate may result from changes in physician behavior, institutional factors, and increasing patient demand for elective cesarean delivery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.051

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The growth in cesarean rates cannot be explained by increases in obstetric risk factors, including delayed and multiple infant pregnancy and maternal obesity.

    “growth that cannot be explained by increases in obstetric risk factors, including those associated with delayed and multiple infant pregnancy and maternal obesity3–6”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bailit, J. L., Love, T. E., & Mercer, B.
Affiliations
MetroHealth (US)
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-09
Volume
191
Issue
3
Pages
800-803
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981403167
Cited by
79
References
19
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K12 HD98004)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
Keywords
cesarean section, primary cesarean section, patient risk factors, low-risk women, elective cesarean section, physician behavior, birth certificates, North Carolina
MeSH terms
Adult, Cesarean Section, Female, Humans, Physician's Role, Pregnancy, Risk Factors, Logistic Models, Patient Satisfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review