Planned caesarean section decreases the risk of adverse perinatal outcome due to both labour and delivery complications in the Term Breech Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if the decreased risk of adverse perinatal outcome, with a policy of planned caesarean, in the Term Breech Trial, was due to a reduction of problems of labour, problems of delivery or unrelated problems. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from the Term Breech Trial, a randomised controlled trial of planned caesarean versus planned vaginal birth for the singleton fetus in frank or complete breech presentation at term. SETTING: Women were recruited from 121 centres in 26 countries. POPULATION: Women who were enrolled in the Term Breech Trial. METHODS: Adverse perinatal outcome was classified as due to labour, due to delivery, due to neither labour nor delivery or unexplained by an experienced obstetrician who was masked to allocation group. The risk of an adverse outcome in each category was compared according to intention to treat and also by actual method of delivery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adverse perinatal outcome (excluding lethal congenital anomalies) that was due to labour, due to delivery, due to neither labour nor delivery or unexplained. RESULTS: Planned caesarean was associated with a lower risk of adverse outcome due to both labour (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.45, P < 0.001) and delivery (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.87, P= 0.03), compared with planned vaginal birth. Prelabour caesarean and caesarean during early labour were associated with the lowest risk and vaginal birth was associated with the highest risk of adverse outcome due to both labour (0%, 0.4% and 2.2%, respectively) and delivery (0.2%, 0% and 3.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Planned caesarean decreases the risk of adverse perinatal outcome due to both problems of labour and problems of delivery for the singleton fetus in breech presentation at term, compared with planned vaginal birth.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".