Cited by 60Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsReproductive Health and ContraceptionGlobal Maternal and Child Health

A qualitative study to explore the attitudes of women and obstetricians towards caesarean delivery in rural Bangladesh

Open access
Begum, Tahmina, Ellis, Cathryn, Sarker, Malabika, Rostoker, Jean-Francois, Rahman, Aminur, Anwar, Iqbal, Reichenbach, Laura·2018·BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section is a lifesaving surgical intervention for women and their newborns, though overutilization is a public health concern. The caesarean rate in Bangladesh is approximately 23% overall, and in private facilities it is over 70%. It is essential to know both the supply side (obstetricians) and demand side (parturient women) views on caesarean birth in order to formulate specific interventions to address the escalating rate of caesareans. METHODS: This qualitative study took place in Matlab, a rural sub-district in Bangladesh. We interviewed women attending their 3rd antenatal visit, those with recent caesareans, and obstetricians from both public and private health facilities. In total there were twenty in-depth interviews and four focus group discussions. Study participants were asked about their preferences on birthing mode and knowledge of the caesarean section process. Thematic data analysis was done following a deductive approach. RESULTS: Women from this rural community had a strong preference for normal vaginal birth. However, they were willing to accept the attending health care provider's decision for caesarean birth. Antenatal care sessions did not provide information on the medical indications for caesarean section. Furthermore, some women had the misconception that episiotomy itself is a 'small caesarean.' Primary health care providers and clinic agents (brokers) had a strong influence on women's decision to choose a health facility for giving birth. However, obstetricians, having a preference for caesarean section, were receiving more patients from these brokers which may be an important reason for the high rate of clinically non-indicated caesareans at private hospitals in Bangladesh. Improper labour monitoring and inadequate staffing at health facilities were additional influences on the preference for caesarean section. However, critical knowledge gaps were also observed among study obstetricians, particularly with regards to the indications for and timing of elective caesarean sections. CONCLUSION: There is a need to educate women about the advantages and disadvantages of different birthing modes to ensure their active participation in the decision making process. Strong policy regulations are needed to ensure legitimate decision making by obstetricians regarding mode of birthing.

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 · 10.1186/s12884-018-1993-9

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [21]Ritchie J, Lewis J, Nicholls CM, Ormston R. Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2014.
  2. [42]World Health Organization. Bangladesh health system review. Manila: WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific; 2015.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Begum, T., Ellis, C., Sarker, M., Rostoker, J.-F., Rahman, A., Anwar, I., & Reichenbach, L.
Affiliations
  • International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research (BD)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • Population Council (US)
Corresponding author
Begum, Tahmina
Venue
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published
2018-09-12
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
368-368
ISSN
1471-2393 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2891259800
Cited by
60
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6
FWCI
5.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • cIRcle (University of British Columbia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • BRAC University Institutional Repository (BRAC University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh
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 › Global Maternal and Child Health
Keywords
cesarean section, women's attitudes, obstetricians' attitudes, vaginal delivery, prenatal care, private hospitals, labour monitoring, health facility staffing, elective cesarean section, rural Bangladesh, maternal decision-making
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Health, Bangladesh, Cesarean Section, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Physicians, Pregnancy, Rural Population, Qualitative Research, Young Adult

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