The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Rising cesarean section (CS) rates are a major public health concern and cause worldwide debates. To propose and implement effective measures to reduce or increase CS rates where necessary requires an appropriate classification. Despite several existing CS classifications, there has not yet been a systematic review of these. This study aimed to 1) identify the main CS classifications used worldwide, 2) analyze advantages and deficiencies of each system. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Three electronic databases were searched for classifications published 1968-2008. Two reviewers independently assessed classifications using a form created based on items rated as important by international experts. Seven domains (ease, clarity, mutually exclusive categories, totally inclusive classification, prospective identification of categories, reproducibility, implementability) were assessed and graded. Classifications were tested in 12 hypothetical clinical case-scenarios. From a total of 2948 citations, 60 were selected for full-text evaluation and 27 classifications identified. Indications classifications present important limitations and their overall score ranged from 2-9 (maximum grade =14). Degree of urgency classifications also had several drawbacks (overall scores 6-9). Woman-based classifications performed best (scores 5-14). Other types of classifications require data not routinely collected and may not be relevant in all settings (scores 3-8). CONCLUSIONS: This review and critical appraisal of CS classifications is a methodologically sound contribution to establish the basis for the appropriate monitoring and rational use of CS. Results suggest that women-based classifications in general, and Robson's classification, in particular, would be in the best position to fulfill current international and local needs and that efforts to develop an internationally applicable CS classification would be most appropriately placed in building upon this classification. The use of a single CS classification will facilitate auditing, analyzing and comparing CS rates across different settings and help to create and implement effective strategies specifically targeted to optimize CS rates where necessary.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Tenth revision.
Brämer, G. R. (1988) · PubMed · Cited by 1,492
Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates
Betrán, A. P., Merialdi, M., Lauer, J. A., Bing‐Shun, W., Thomas, J., Van Look, P., & Wagner, M. (2007) · Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3016.2007.00786.x · Cited by 1,045
Self-citationClassification of caesarean sections
Robson, M. (2001) · Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review · doi:10.1017/s0965539501000122 · Cited by 601
The Risks of Lowering the Cesarean-Delivery Rate
Sachs, B. P., Kobelin, C., Castro, M. A., & Frigoletto, F. (1999) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199901073400112 · Cited by 471
Urgency of caesarean section: A new classification
Lucas, D. N., Yentis, S. M., Kinsella, S. M., Holdcroft, A., May, A. E., Wee, M., & Robinson, P. N. (2000) · Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1177/014107680009300703 · Cited by 463
(2001) · ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) · Cited by 434
Active management of labor as an alternative to cesarean section for dystocia.
O’Driscoll, K., Foley, M. E., & MacDonald, D. (1984) · PubMed · Cited by 315
Fish can't see water: the need to humanize birth
Wagner, M. (2001) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1016/s0020-7292(01)00519-7 · Cited by 249
Health Consequences of the Increasing Caesarean Section Rates
Belizán, J. M., Althabe, F., & Cafferata, M. L. (2007) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e318068646a · Cited by 217
Althabe, F., Belizán, J. M., Villar, J., Alexander, S., Bergel, E., Ramos, S., Romero, M., Donner, A., Lindmark, G., Langer, A., et al. (2004) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(04)16406-4 · Cited by 189
Cited by
Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates
Betran, A. P., Ye, J., Moller, A.-B., Souza, J. P., & Zhang, J. (2021) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671 · Cited by 1,562
Self-citationWHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates
Betran, A., Torloni, M., Zhang, J., Gülmezoglu, A., & the WHO Working Group on Caesarean Section (2016) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13526 · Cited by 1,238
Self-citation(2015) · Reproductive Health Matters · doi:10.1016/j.rhm.2015.07.007 · Cited by 1,079
Betran, A. P., Torloni, M. R., Zhang, J., Ye, J., Mikolajczyk, R., Deneux-Tharaux, C., Oladapo, O. T., Souza, J. P., Tunçalp, Ö., Vogel, J. P., et al. (2015) · Reproductive Health · doi:10.1186/s12978-015-0043-6 · Cited by 585
Self-citationSobhy, S., Arroyo-Manzano, D., Murugesu, N., Karthikeyan, G., Kumar, V., Kaur, I., Fernandez, E., Gundabattula, S. R., Betran, A. P., Khan, K., et al. (2019) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32386-9 · Cited by 369
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Torloni, M. R., Betran, A. P., Souza, J. P., Widmer, M., Allen, T., Gulmezoglu, M., & Merialdi, M.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-01-20
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e14566
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2091638657
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 3.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
- The paper
- Torloni, M. R., Betran, A. P., Souza, J. P., Widmer, M., Allen, T., Gulmezoglu, M., & Merialdi, M. (2011). Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
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.