Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 700

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of a Trial of Labor with an Elective Second Cesarean Section

Open access
McMahon, Michael J., Luther, Edwin R., Bowes, Watson A., Olshan, Andrew F.·1996·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to reduce the rate of cesarean section, obstetricians now offer a trial of labor to pregnant women who have had a previous cesarean section. Although a trial of labor is usually successful and is relatively safe, few studies have directly addressed the maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality associated with this method of delivery. METHODS: We performed a population-based, longitudinal study of 6138 women in Nova Scotia who had previously undergone cesarean section and had delivered a singleton live infant in the period from 1986 through 1992. RESULTS: A total of 3249 women elected a trial of labor, and 2889 women chose to undergo a second cesarean section. There were no maternal deaths. The overall rate of maternal morbidity was 8.1 percent; 1.3 percent had major complications (a need for hysterectomy, uterine rupture, or operative injury) and 6.9 percent had minor complications (puerperal fever, a need for blood transfusion, or abdominal-wound infection). Although the overall rate of maternal complications did not differ significantly between women who chose a trial of labor and the women who elected cesarean section (odds ratio for the trial-of-labor group, 0.9; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.1), major complications were nearly twice as likely among women undergoing a trial of labor (odds ratio, 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 3.0). Apgar scores, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, and perinatal mortality were similar among the infants whose mothers had a trial of labor and those whose mothers underwent elective cesarean section. CONCLUSION: Among pregnant women who have had a cesarean section, major maternal complications are almost twice as likely among those whose deliveries are managed with a trial of labor as among those who undergo an elective second cesarean section.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199609053351001

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 700

Metadata

Authors
McMahon, M. J., Luther, E. R., Bowes, W. A., & Olshan, A. F.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1996-09-05
Volume
335
Issue
10
Pages
689-695
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2022655964
Cited by
700
References
0
FWCI
23.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of a Trial of Labor with an Elective Second Cesarean Section. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199609053351001
The paper
McMahon, M. J., Luther, E. R., Bowes, W. A., & Olshan, A. F. (1996). Comparison of a Trial of Labor with an Elective Second Cesarean Section. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199609053351001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.