Prevalence and determinants of uterine rupture in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Uterine rupture is a serious public health concern that causes high maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality in the developing world . Few of the studies conducted in Ethiopia show a high discrepancy in the prevalence of uterine rupture, which ranges between 1.6 and 16.7%. There also lacks a national study on this issue in Ethiopia. This systematic and meta-analysis, therefore, was conducted to assess the prevalence and determinants of uterine rupture in Ethiopia. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic review and meta-analysis of studies. All observational published studies were retrieved using relevant search terms in Google scholar, African Journals Online, CINHAL, HINARI, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and PubMed (Medline) databases. Newcastle–Ottawa assessment checklist for observational studies was used for critical appraisal of the included articles. The meta-analysis was done with STATA version 14 software. The I 2 test statistics were used to assess heterogeneity among included studies, and publication bias was assessed using Begg's and Egger's tests. Odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was presented using forest plots. A total of twelve studies were included in this study. The pooled prevalence of uterine rupture was 3.98% (95% CI 3.02, 4.95). The highest (7.82%) and lowest (1.53%) prevalence were identified in Amhara and Southern Nations, Nationality and Peoples Region (SNNPR), respectively. Determinants of uterine rupture were urban residence (OR = 0.15 (95% CI 0.09, 0.23)), primipara (OR = 0.12 (95% CI 0.06, 0.27)), previous cesarean section (OR = 3.23 (95% CI 2.12, 4.92)), obstructed labor(OR = 12.21 (95% CI 6.01, 24.82)), and partograph utilization (OR = 0.12 (95% CI 0.09, 0.17)). Almost one in twenty-five mothers had uterine rupture in Ethiopia. Urban residence, primiparity, previous cesarean section, obstructed labor and partograph utilization were significantly associated with uterine rupture. Therefore, intervention programs should address the identified factors to reduce the prevalence of uterine rupture.
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 | 0.015 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".