MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289262458 · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004077

Crude and adjusted comparisons of cesarean delivery rates using the Robson classification: A population-based cohort study in Canada and Sweden, 2004 to 2016

2022· article· en· W4289262458 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Giulia M. Muraca, K.S. Joseph, Neda Razaz, Linnea V. Ladfors, Sarka Lisonkova, Olof Stephansson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaImpactUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och VälfärdNorges ForskningsrådVetenskapsrådetKarolinska InstitutetMichael Smith Health Research BCBC Children's Hospital
KeywordsMedicineDemographyPoisson regressionPopulationOverweightCohortCohort studyRate ratioObesityObstetricsEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Robson classification has become a global standard for comparing and monitoring cesarean delivery (CD) rates across populations and over time; however, this classification does not account for differences in important maternal, fetal, and obstetric practice factors known to impact CD rates. The objectives of our study were to identify subgroups of women contributing to differences in the CD rate in Sweden and British Columbia (BC), Canada using the Robson classification and to estimate the contribution of maternal, fetal/infant, and obstetric practice factors to differences in CD rates between countries and over time. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of deliveries in Sweden (January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2016; n = 1,392,779) and BC (March 1, 2004 to April 31, 2017; n = 559,205). Deliveries were stratified into Robson categories and the CD rate, relative size of each group and its contribution to the overall CD rate were compared between the Swedish and the Canadian cohorts. Poisson and log-binomial regression were used to assess the contribution of maternal, fetal, and obstetric practice factors to spatiotemporal differences in Robson group-specific CD rates between Sweden and BC. Nulliparous women comprised 44.8% of the study population, while women of advanced maternal age (≥35 years) and women with overweight/obesity (≥25 kg/m2) constituted 23.5% and 32.4% of the study population, respectively. The CD rate in Sweden was stable at approximately 17.0% from 2004 to 2016 (p for trend = 0.10), while the CD rate increased in BC from 29.4% to 33.9% (p for trend < 0.001). Differences in CD rates between Sweden and BC varied by Robson group, for example, in Group 1 (nullipara with a term, single, cephalic fetus with spontaneous labor), the CD rate was 8.1% in Sweden and 20.4% in BC (rate ratio [RR] for BC versus Sweden = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.49 to 2.56, p < 0.001) and in Group 2 (nullipara, single, cephalic fetus, term gestation with induction of labor or prelabor CD), the rate of CD was 37.3% in Sweden and 45.9% in BC (RR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.25, p < 0.001). The effect of adjustment for maternal characteristics (e.g., age, body mass index), maternal comorbidity (e.g., preeclampsia), fetal characteristics (e.g., head position), and obstetric practice factors (e.g., epidural) ranged from no effect (e.g., among breech deliveries; Groups 6 and 7) to explaining up to 5.2% of the absolute difference in the CD rate (Group 2: adjusted CD rate in BC 40.7%, adjusted RR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.12, p < 0.001). Adjustment also explained a substantial fraction of the temporal change in CD rates among some Robson groups in BC. Limitations of the study include a lack of information on intrapartum details, such as labor duration as well as maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with the observed differences in CD rates. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that several factors not included in the Robson classification explain a significant proportion of the spatiotemporal difference in CD rates in some Robson groups. These findings suggest that incorporating these factors into explanatory models using the Robson classification may be useful for ensuring that public health initiatives regarding CD rates are evidence informed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS MedicineSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207