↓ Skip to main content

Variation in hospital caesarean section rates for women with at least one previous caesarean section: a population based cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Variation in hospital caesarean section rates for women with at least one previous caesarean section: a population based cohort study
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12884-015-0609-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathrin Schemann, Jillian A. Patterson, Tanya A. Nippita, Jane B. Ford, Christine L. Roberts

Abstract

Internationally, repeat caesarean sections make the largest contribution to overall caesarean section rates and inter-hospital variation has been reported. The aim of this study was to determine if casemix and hospital factors explain variation in hospital rates of repeat caesarean sections and whether these rates are associated with maternal and neonatal morbidity. This population-based record linkage study utilised data from New South Wales, Australia between 2007 and 2011. The study population included maternities with any previous caesarean section(s) and were singleton, cephalic and ≥37 weeks' gestation (Robson Group 5). Multilevel regression models were used to examine variation in hospital rates of 'planned repeat caesarean section' and, among women who planned a vaginal birth, 'intrapartum caesarean section'. We assessed associations between risk-adjusted hospital rates of planned and intrapartum caesarean sections and rates of casemix adjusted maternal and neonatal morbidity, postpartum haemorrhage and Apgar score <7 at five minutes. Of 61894 maternities with a previous caesarean section in 81 hospitals, 82.1 % resulted in a caesarean section (72.7 % planned and 9.4 % unplanned intrapartum caesareans) and 17.9 % in vaginal birth. Observed hospital rates of planned caesarean sections ranged from 50.7 % to 98.4 %. Overall 49.0 % of between-hospital variation in planned repeat caesarean section rates was explained by patient (17.3 %) and hospital factors (31.7 %). Increased odds of planned caesarean section were associated with private hospital status and lower hospital propensity for vaginal birth after caesarean. There were no associations between hospital rates of planned repeat caesarean section and adjusted morbidity rates. Among women who intended a vaginal birth, the observed rates of intrapartum caesarean section ranged from 12.9 % to 71.9 %. In total, 27.5 % of between-hospital variation in rates of intrapartum caesarean section was explained by patient (19.5 %) and hospital factors (8.0 %). The adjusted morbidity rates differed among hospital intrapartum caesarean section rates, but were influenced by a few hospitals with outlying morbidity rates. Among women with at least one previous caesarean section, less than half of the variation in hospital caesarean section rates was explained by differences in hospital's patient characteristics and practices. Strategies aimed at modifying caesarean section rates for these women should not affect morbidity rates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 16%
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Postgraduate 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 23 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 24 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 November 2019.
All research outputs
#6,152,410
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1,696
of 4,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,581
of 266,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#29
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.