MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Cluster-Randomized Trial to Reduce Cesarean Delivery Rates in Quebec

2015· article· en· W2257705947 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nils Chaillet, Alexandre Dumont, Michał Abrahamowicz, Jean‐Charles Pasquier, François Audibert, Patricia Monnier, Haim A. Abenhaim, Éric Dubé, Marylène Dugas, Rebecca Burne, William D. Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityThe Quebec Population Health Research NetworkCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialAuditIntervention (counseling)Cesarean deliveryClinical trialCluster randomised controlled trialObstetricsPregnancyNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In developed countries, cesarean delivery rates are high and increasing. Strategies to reduce cesarean delivery rates have been the subject of recent studies and guidelines. While these studies suggest strategies involving audits and feedback are generally effective, there have not been large randomized trial data assessing the effects of a multifaceted strategy. This trial aims to assess whether the rate of cesarean delivery would be reduced by a multifaceted intervention promoting on-site training with audits and feedback. The QUARISMA (Quality of Care, Obstetrics Risk Management and Mode of Delivery) trial was conducted between April 1, 2008, and October 31, 2011, at 32 public hospitals in Quebec. Hospitals included had to have a 17% cesarean delivery rate or higher and at least 300 deliveries the year before. For inclusion, infants had to be born at least 24 weeks’ gestation and weigh at least 500 g at delivery. Hospitals were randomly assigned to either a control or intervention group. The study spanned 3.5 years, first with a yearlong baseline period followed by a 1.5-year intervention period, and concluded with a yearlong postintervention period. Instructors from the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada provided training in evidence-based clinical practices. The intervention program also included clinical audits. There was no financial incentive. There was no intervention in the control groups. A total of 184,952 women delivered during the study period. In the control group, the baseline cesarean delivery rate was 23.2%, and in the intervention group, the rate was 22.5%. After intervention, the rate of cesarean delivery was 23.5% in the control group and 21.8% in the intervention group (P = 0.04). In both groups, rates of labor induction increased, but increased more in the control group than in the intervention group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.87; P < 0.001; adjusted risk difference, −3.8%; 95% confidence interval, −5.1% to −2.7%). A statistically significant reduction in the cesarean delivery rate was seen in low-risk pregnancies (−1.7%, P = 0.03) but not among high-risk pregnancies (P = 0.35). The reduction was significant but small. Interestingly, both major and minor neonatal morbidity in both low- and high-risk pregnancies was significantly reduced after intervention (adjusted risk difference, −0.7% for major morbidity [P = 0.03] and −1.7% for minor morbidity [P < 0.001]). This trial confirmed previous studies suggesting benefits of a multifaceted strategy involving audits and feedback. It is not clear, however, which aspects of the intervention program were responsible for the reduction in the rate of cesarean deliveries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207