The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet; none of the 2 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Sociodemographic Factors Influencing Choice of the Mode of Delivery in Pregnant Women: A Cross-sectional Study from Tertiary Hospital in Srinagar, India
Open accessAbstract
This was a cross-sectional, hospital-based study to examine the sociodemographic factors influencing expecting mother’s choice of delivery: cesarean delivery or vaginal delivery.
Checked 2026-10-05 · 1 reference not checked yet
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 2 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data
In this study population, socioeconomic status was not significantly associated with preference for mode of delivery.
“Our population's financial situation had no bearing on how they desired to receive their care.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In univariate analysis, women aged 30-34 years had higher odds of preferring cesarean delivery than the reference age group (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.22-2.13, p=0.001).
“patients with increasing age (30-34: OR: 1.61, p-value = 0.001; 35-39: OR: 1.94, p-value < 0.001) preferred CD over VD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“Simple logistic regression (Table 3) revealed that patients with increasing age (30-34 -OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.22-2.13,p-value = 0.001; 35-39 -OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.34-2.81,p-value < 0.001) preferred LSCS over normal vaginal delivery.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In univariate analysis, multigravid women had higher odds of preferring cesarean delivery (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.32-2.22, p<0.001).
“Participants residing in urban areas (OR: 1.93, p-value < 0.001) and multigravid women (OR: 1.71, p-value < 0.001) preferred CD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“Participants residing in urban areas (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.44-2.59,p-value < 0.001), and patients who were multigravida (OR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.32-2.22,p-value < 0.001) had more likelihood of choosing LSCS.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In this study, educational status was not statistically significantly associated with preference for mode of delivery.
“In our study, the educational status was not statistically significant with the preference of a mode of delivery.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
In univariate analysis, receiving information from healthcare professionals was associated with lower odds of choosing cesarean delivery (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09-0.28, p<0.001).
“Participants who had undergone both lower segment caesarean section (LSCS) and VD in the past and those who received information from healthcare professionals (OR: 0.17, 95% confidence interval (Cl): 0.09-0.28,p-value < 0.001) did not choose CD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“Participants who received information from healthcare professionals (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09-0.28,p-value < 0.001) and patients with a history of both NVD and LSCS (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.26-0.94,p-value 0.032) had less likelihood of choosing LSCS.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In the study sample, 56.1% of pregnant women preferred cesarean delivery (lower segment cesarean section) over vaginal delivery.
“Among them, 561 (56.1%) preferred CD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“On enquiring regarding the preference of delivery, 56.1% said they preferred an LSCS.”
- Also stated in: § dIscussIon · boosted
“On enquiring regarding the preference of delivery, a staggering 56.1% said they preferred an LSCS.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In univariate analysis, women aged 35-39 years had higher odds of preferring cesarean delivery than the reference age group (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.34-2.81, p<0.001).
“patients with increasing age (30-34: OR: 1.61, p-value = 0.001; 35-39: OR: 1.94, p-value < 0.001) preferred CD over VD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“Simple logistic regression (Table 3) revealed that patients with increasing age (30-34 -OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.22-2.13,p-value = 0.001; 35-39 -OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.34-2.81,p-value < 0.001) preferred LSCS over normal vaginal delivery.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In multivariate analysis, receiving information from healthcare professionals remained associated with lower odds of choosing cesarean delivery (AOR 0.15, 95% CI 0.09-0.27, p<0.001).
“patients who received information from a healthcare professional (AOR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.09-0.27,p-value < 0.001) did not choose CD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“patients who received information from a healthcare professional (AOR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.09-0.27,p-value < 0.001) were less likely to choose LSCS”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In multivariate analysis, multigravid women remained associated with higher odds of preferring cesarean delivery (AOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.11-2.17, p=0.009).
“Multivariate analysis revealed that urban residency adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.73, p-value = 0.001), multigravid women AOR: 1.56, p-value = 0.009) preferred CD”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“complex logistic regression (Table 3) found that urban residency (AOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.25-2.39,p-value = 0.001), patients who were multigravida (AOR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.11-2.17,p-value = 0.009) were more likely to prefer LSCS”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In univariate analysis, a history of both lower segment cesarean section and vaginal delivery was associated with lower odds of choosing cesarean delivery (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.94, p=0.032).
“patients with a history of both NVD and LSCS (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.26-0.94,p-value 0.032) had less likelihood of choosing LSCS.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
In univariate analysis, urban residence was associated with higher odds of preferring cesarean delivery (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.44-2.59, p<0.001).
“Participants residing in urban areas (OR: 1.93, p-value < 0.001) and multigravid women (OR: 1.71, p-value < 0.001) preferred CD.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“Participants residing in urban areas (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.44-2.59,p-value < 0.001), and patients who were multigravida (OR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.32-2.22,p-value < 0.001) had more likelihood of choosing LSCS.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Findingown data
In multivariate analysis, urban residence remained associated with higher odds of preferring cesarean delivery (AOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.39, p=0.001).
“Multivariate analysis revealed that urban residency adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.73, p-value = 0.001), multigravid women AOR: 1.56, p-value = 0.009) preferred CD”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“complex logistic regression (Table 3) found that urban residency (AOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.25-2.39,p-value = 0.001), patients who were multigravida (AOR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.11-2.17,p-value = 0.009) were more likely to prefer LSCS”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § results · plain
- Interpretationreasoning
The single-center design in a public tertiary care center limits the generalizability of the study results.
“The single-center study design in a public sector (Tertiary Care Center) limits the generalizability of the study results.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
The cesarean delivery rate in India is 21.5%.
“Cesarean delivery (CD) rates in India (21.5%) and in Jammu and Kashmir (41.7%), in particular, are way above the World Health Organization (WHO) accepted threshold of 10-15%.”
- Also stated in: § IntroductIon · plain
“C-section births in India increased by 4.3 percentage points over the five years to 21.5% (NFHS-5).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites NFHS-5
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Also stated in: § IntroductIon · plain
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
- Probably not a substantial claim. 9
- It may state two separate claims as one. 4
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataThe most common source of information about safety and risks of delivery modes was healthcare professionals, reported by 88.0% of participants.
“The source of information regarding safety and risks of the mode of delivery was healthcare personnel in 88.0% of patients.”
- Also stated in: § Source of Information · plain
“In our study, the most commonly reported source of information was Healthcare professionals”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Also stated in: § Source of Information · plain
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataThe study enrolled 1,000 pregnant women who consented and completed the questionnaire between August 2017 and July 2019.
“Between August 2017 and July 2019, 1000 pregnant women participated in the study.”
- Also stated in: § results · plain
“A total of 1,000 women gave consent to participate in the study and completed the questionnaire.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Also stated in: § results · plain
Probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationown dataThe study's findings help in understanding the variables that affect childbearing women's decisions about delivery technique.
“The findings of this study help us better understand the variables affecting childbearing women's decisions regarding the technique of delivery.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Women's stated preference for a mode of delivery reflects their actual choice of mode of delivery.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Premisenone givenThe cesarean delivery rate in Jammu and Kashmir is 41.7%.
“Cesarean delivery (CD) rates in India (21.5%) and in Jammu and Kashmir (41.7%), in particular, are way above the World Health Organization (WHO) accepted threshold of 10-15%.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe World Health Organization's accepted threshold for cesarean delivery is 10-15%.
“way above the World Health Organization (WHO) accepted threshold of 10-15%.”
- Also stated in: § IntroductIon · plain
“far above the recommended threshold of 10-15% by the World Health Organization (WHO). 1”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [1] 1. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985;2(8452):436–437. PMID: 2863457. source
- Also stated in: § IntroductIon · plain
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Study design and conductreasoningEthics Committee approval from the Institute was obtained before the study began.
“The study was conducted after approval from the Institute's Ethics Committee.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Study design and conductnone givenThe large sample size and good representation of both younger and older women are strengths of the study.
“The large sample size and a good representation of younger (< 30 years) as well as older women (≥30 years) are a few strengths of the study.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Study design and conductown dataThe study had disproportionate distributions of habitat and previous delivery mode, with nearly 50% having previous LSCS and only 10% having previous vaginal delivery.
“Disproportionate distribution of habitat (rural and urban) and mode of previous delivery (nearly 50% had previous LSCS, and only 10% had VD).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Study design and conductown dataAll participants provided written informed consent.
“written informed consent was obtained from all the participants.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Study design and conductnone givenNo prior sample size calculation was performed.
“A prior sample size calculation was not done.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Study design and conductnone givenThe study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and good clinical practice criteria.
“The declaration of Helsinki and the criteria for good clinical practice were followed during the study's execution.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Women's stated preference for a mode of delivery reflects their actual choice of mode of delivery.
“The study aimed to recognize the sociodemographic components associated with preference for the mode of delivery.”
“On enquiring regarding the preference of delivery, 56.1% said they preferred an LSCS.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Information provided by healthcare professionals causally reduces women's preference for cesarean delivery.
“This underscores the need for proper counseling of expectant mothers by healthcare professionals, which can help decrease the rising and unhealthy trends of CD.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Previous-delivery counts and percentages do not match the stated total
MinorThe table gives counts for previous delivery categories that sum to 1000, but the accompanying percentages sum to 100.0 only if 24.5 is treated as 245, not 24.5. As printed, 'Upper' is the only category where count and percentage are inconsistent with the 1000-person denominator.
“| Upper | 24.5 | 24.50 |”
“A total of 1,000 women gave consent to participate in the study and completed the questionnaire.”
Conflicting confidence intervals for urban residency
MinorThe results and discussion give different 95% confidence intervals for the same adjusted odds ratio of 1.73 for urban residency.
“urban residency (AOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.25-2.39,p-value = 0.001)”
“urban residency (AOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.24-2.42,p-value = 0.001)”
Upper socioeconomic group frequency does not match its percentage
MinorThe table lists a frequency of 24.5 among 1,000 participants, which is 2.45%, not 24.50%. The 24.50% figure corresponds to 245 participants.
Reported 24.5 · recomputed 2.45
“| Upper | 24.5 | 24.50 |”
Citations
Cites
The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014
Betrán, A. P., Ye, J., Moller, A.-B., Zhang, J., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Torloni, M. R. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148343 · Cited by 2,250
APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY FOR BIRTH
(1985) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(85)92750-3 · Cited by 594
Preference for Institutional Delivery and Caesarean Sections in Bangladesh
Kamal, S. M. M. (2013) · Journal of Health Population and Nutrition · doi:10.3329/jhpn.v31i1.14754 · Cited by 121
International Journal of Scientific Reports
Zhu, J., Arsovska, B., & Kozovska, K. (2015) · International Journal of Scientific Reports · doi:10.18203/issn.2454-2156 · Cited by 86
Women’s Preferences of Method of Delivery and Influencing Factors
Yılmaz, S. D., Bal, M. D., Beji, N. K., & Uludağ, S. (2013) · Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal · doi:10.5812/ircmj.11532 · Cited by 40
Increasing Trend of Caesarean Rates in India: Evidence from NFHS-4
T.Radhakrishnan, A. (2017) · Journal of Medical Science And clinical Research · doi:10.18535/jmscr/v5i8.31 · Cited by 33
Pragmatic and Observational Research
(2020) · Pragmatic and Observational Research · doi:10.2147/por · Cited by 29
Zewude, B., Siraw, G., & Adem, Y. (2022) · Pragmatic and Observational Research · doi:10.2147/por.s370513 · Cited by 27
Varghese, S., Singh, S., Kour, G., & Dhar, T. (2016) · International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences · doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20163299 · Cited by 15
Preferences of pregnant women regarding mode of delivery: a questionnaire based study
Dogra, P., & Sharma, R. K. (2017) · International Journal of Scientific Reports · doi:10.18203/issn.2454-2156.intjscirep20174870 · Cited by 12
The relationship of socio-demographic and reproductive factors with preferred type of birth
Abbaspoor, Z., & Noori, M. (2016) · International Journal of Reproduction Contraception Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20161660 · Cited by 6
Factors influencing women’s choice of mode of delivery in rural Bangalore, India
Ansari, N. F. T., Balan, A., & Saxena, R. K. (2019) · Indian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Research · doi:10.18231/2394-2754.2019.0016 · Cited by 6
Karna, J., & Malhotra, V. M. (2017) · International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health · doi:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20173365 · Cited by 2
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- 5. Saoji A, Nayse J, Kasturwar N, et al. Women's knowledge, perceptions, and potential demand towards caesarean section. Natl J Community Med 2011;2(2):244–248. DOI: https://njcmindia.com/index.php/file/article/view/1891.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
El-shrqawy, E. H., El-Nemer, A. M. R., & El-Sayed, H. E.-S. M. (2024) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-024-06922-0 · Cited by 12
“The present study findings were supported by the results of [25] who evaluated the effect of birth preparation classes on knowledge, attitude, and preference of delivery method in primiparous women and showed that the mean score of knowledge increased in the intervention group with statistical…”
Vijayakumar, S., Manivasagan, M. S., Chaithra, M., & S., M. B. (2025) · Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences · doi:10.4103/amhs.amhs_266_24 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Wani, I. R., Sultana, S., Waris, M., & Rao, A. R.
- Affiliations
- Government Medical College (IN)
- All India Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
- Venue
- Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Publisher
- Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishing
- Published
- 2024-02-23
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 111-115
- ISSN
- 0974-8938 (ISSN-L)
- 0975-1920
- OpenAlex
- W4392077899
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 1.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (publishedVersion)
- 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, vaginal delivery, mode of delivery preference, sociodemographic factors, cesarean section rate, urban residence, prenatal care
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
