Decision Making in Patient‐Initiated Elective Cesarean Delivery: The Influence of Birth Stories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patient-initiated elective cesarean delivery is emerging as an urgent issue for practitioners, hospitals, and policy makers and for pregnant women. This exploratory qualitative study looks at the birth stories and cultural knowledge that women use to inform the decision about an elective cesarean without medical indication. Data collection consisted of exploratory qualitative in-depth interviews with 17 primiparous women in British Columbia, Canada. Interviews revealed the influence of socially circulated birth stories and cultural narratives on their attitudes towards mode of delivery. Participants included in their decision making process both medical information and informal birth stories that were technologically inclined and confirmed their preference for cesarean delivery. Results indicate that women who participated in this study drew heavily from social and cultural knowledge in forming their decision to give birth by patient-initiated elective cesarean delivery. Although the numbers of women who request a cesarean delivery for social reasons is still small, the persuasive influence on parturient women of positive cesarean stories and negative vaginal stories must be considered. Care providers and childbirth educators need to become familiar with the social influences impacting women's decisions for mode of delivery so that truly informed choice discussions can be undertaken.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".