Maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery without labor compared with spontaneous onset of labor at term
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the maternal morbidity associated with cesarean deliveries performed at term without labor compared with morbidity associated with spontaneous labor. METHODS: A 14-year, population-based, cohort study (1988-2001) using the Nova Scotia Atlee Perinatal Database compared maternal outcomes in nulliparous women at term undergoing spontaneous labor for planned vaginal delivery with singleton, cephalic presentation and nulliparous women delivering by cesarean without labor. RESULTS: From a total of 18,435 pregnancies, which satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria, 721 were cesarean deliveries without labor. There were no maternal deaths or transfers for intensive care. There was no difference in wound infection, blood transfusion, or intraoperative trauma. Women undergoing cesarean deliveries without labor were more likely to have puerperal febrile morbidity (relative risk [RR] 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1, 4.5; P=.03), but were less likely to have early postpartum hemorrhage (RR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4, 0.9; P=.01) compared with women entering spontaneous labor. Subgroup analyses of maternal outcomes in women delivering by spontaneous and assisted vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery in labor were also performed. The highest morbidity was found in the assisted vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery in labor groups. CONCLUSION: The increased maternal morbidity in elective cesarean delivery compared with spontaneous onset of labor is limited to puerperal febrile morbidity. Maternal morbidity is increased after assisted vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery in labor compared with cesarean delivery without labor.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".