Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,195

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014

Open access
Betrán, Ana Pilar, Ye, Jianfeng, Moller, Anne-Beth, Zhang, Jun, Gülmezoglu, A. Metin, Torloni, Maria Regina·2016·PLOS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section (CS) rates continue to evoke worldwide concern because of their steady increase, lack of consensus on the appropriate CS rate and the associated additional short- and long-term risks and costs. We present the latest CS rates and trends over the last 24 years. METHODS: We collected nationally-representative data on CS rates between 1990 to 2014 and calculated regional and subregional weighted averages. We conducted a longitudinal analysis calculating differences in CS rates as absolute change and as the average annual rate of increase (AARI). RESULTS: According to the latest data from 150 countries, currently 18.6% of all births occur by CS, ranging from 6% to 27.2% in the least and most developed regions, respectively. Latin America and the Caribbean region has the highest CS rates (40.5%), followed by Northern America (32.3%), Oceania (31.1%), Europe (25%), Asia (19.2%) and Africa (7.3%). Based on the data from 121 countries, the trend analysis showed that between 1990 and 2014, the global average CS rate increased 12.4% (from 6.7% to 19.1%) with an average annual rate of increase of 4.4%. The largest absolute increases occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean (19.4%, from 22.8% to 42.2%), followed by Asia (15.1%, from 4.4% to 19.5%), Oceania (14.1%, from 18.5% to 32.6%), Europe (13.8%, from 11.2% to 25%), Northern America (10%, from 22.3% to 32.3%) and Africa (4.5%, from 2.9% to 7.4%). Asia and Northern America were the regions with the highest and lowest average annual rate of increase (6.4% and 1.6%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The use of CS worldwide has increased to unprecedented levels although the gap between higher- and lower-resource settings remains. The information presented is essential to inform policy and global and regional strategies aimed at optimizing the use of CS.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0148343

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 2,195

Metadata

Authors
Betrán, A. P., Ye, J., Moller, A.-B., Zhang, J., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Torloni, M. R.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2016-02-05
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
e0148343
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2271393109
Cited by
2,195
References
3
FWCI
235.41
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: The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0148343
The paper
Betrán, A. P., Ye, J., Moller, A.-B., Zhang, J., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Torloni, M. R. (2016). The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148343

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.