MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411062112 · doi:10.2147/ijwh.s517179

Investigating the Success Rate of Vaginal Delivery After Cesarean Section and Its Associated Factors in Afghan Women: Insights from a Maternity Hospital in Kabul

2025· article· en· W4411062112 on OpenAlexaff
Parvin Golzareh, H. Baha, Fahima Aram, Muhammad Haroon Stanikzai, Razia Rabizada, Massoma Jafari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Women s Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAfghanSection (typography)ObstetricsVaginal deliveryGynecologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean delivery (VBAC) is widely regarded as one of the most effective methods to reduce unnecessary Cesarean section and their complications. Despite its proven benefits, data on the success rate of VBAC and the associated factors remain scarce in Afghanistan. This study aimed to address this gap by determining the VBAC success rate and identifying its associated factors in a maternity hospital in Kabul, Afghanistan. Methods: < 0.05. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of VBAC, with VBAC as the outcome variable and multiple predictors included in the model. Results: Among the 567 women included in the study, 449 (79.2%) had a successful VBAC. Factors associated with successful VBAC and their adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) were lower gestational age: 1.25 (1.05-1.48), absence of gestational hypertension: 2.71 (1.26-5.85), cervical dilation of > 4 cm on admission: 2.77 (1.38-5.55), effacement of ≥ 50% on admission: 2.13 (1.04-4.35), and absence of fetal distress: 7.35 (4.29-12.6). Conclusion: The rate of successful VBAC observed in this study is at a high level (79.2%). This study is the first study to determine the VBAC success rate and its associated factors in Afghanistan. Further research is needed to validate these findings and explore additional factors influencing VBAC success.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Women s HealthSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207