Cited by 415Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumAnesthesia and Pain Management

Antenatal fear of childbirth and its association with subsequent caesarean section and experience of childbirth

Waldenström, U, Hildingsson, I, Ryding, EL·2006·BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

Abstract

Objective To investigate the prevalence of fear of childbirth in a nationwide sample and its association with subsequent rates of caesarean section and overall experience of childbirth. Design A prospective study using between-group comparisons. Setting About 600 antenatal clinics in Sweden. Sample A total of 2,662 women recruited at their first visit to an antenatal clinic during three predetermined weeks spread over 1 year. Methods Postal questionnaires at 16 weeks of gestation (mean) and 2 months postpartum. Women with fear of childbirth, defined as 'very negative' feelings when thinking about the delivery in second trimester and/or having undergone counselling because of fear of childbirth later in pregnancy, were compared with those in the reference group without these characteristics. Main outcome measures Elective and emergency caesarean section and overall childbirth experience. Results In total 97 women (3.6%) had very negative feelings and about half of them subsequently underwent counselling. In addition, 193 women (7.2%) who initially had more positive feelings underwent counselling later in pregnancy. In women who underwent counselling, fear of childbirth was associated with a three to six times higher rate of elective caesarean sections but not with higher rates of emergency caesarean section or negative childbirth experience. Very negative feelings without counselling were not associated with an increased caesarean section rate but were associated with a negati…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00950.x

Cites

4 of 4 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Waldenström, U., Hildingsson, I., & Ryding, E.
Affiliations
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • Mid Sweden University (SE)
  • Karolinska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Waldenström, U
Venue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-05-18
Volume
113
Issue
6
Pages
638-646
ISSN
  • 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-0328
  • 1471-0528
OpenAlex
W2114702044
Cited by
415
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 18
FWCI
15.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
Keywords
fear of childbirth, cesarean section, elective cesarean section, emergency cesarean section, childbirth experience, prenatal counseling, prenatal anxiety, pregnancy
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Health, Cesarean Section, Counseling, Fear, Female, Humans, Obstetric Labor Complications, Mothers, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Prenatal Care, Prospective Studies, Prevalence

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