Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Calder (1998)
Survey research methodsMedical Education, 32
L. Paleari, L. Gibbons, Sandra Chacón, Verónica Ramil, J. Belizan (2012)
[Rates of caesarean sections tn two types of private hospitals: restriced-access and open-access].Ginecologia y obstetricia de Mexico, 80 4
(2011)
NICE CG132 Caesarean Section
M. Hyde, N. Modi (2012)
The long-term effects of birth by caesarean section: the case for a randomised controlled trial.Early human development, 88 12
J. Ecker (2013)
Elective cesarean delivery on maternal request.JAMA, 309 18
M. Hannah, W. Hannah (1996)
Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial of planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 174 4
Mauricio Belizán (Co-Investigator)
T. Lavender, C. Kingdon (2009)
Primigravid women's views of being approached to participate in a hypothetical term cephalic trial of planned vaginal birth versus planned cesarean birth.Birth, 36 3
(2011)
2010 Vital Statistics
M. Hannah, W. Hannah, S. Hewson, E. Hodnett, S. Saigal, A. Willan (2000)
Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trialThe Lancet, 356
(2016)
Exploring women’s preferences for the mode of delivery in twin gestations
A. Grant, C. Glazener (2001)
Elective caesarean section versus expectant management for delivery of the small baby.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2
C. Turner, Jane Young, M. Solomon, J. Ludlow, C. Benness, H. Phipps (2008)
Willingness of pregnant women and clinicians to participate in a hypothetical randomised controlled trial comparing vaginal delivery and elective caesarean sectionAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 48
Nancy Liu, A. Mazzoni, Nina Zamberlin, Mercedes Colomar, O. Chang, Lila Arnaud, F. Althabe, J. Belizan (2013)
UC San Francisco UC San Francisco Previously Published Works Title Preferences for mode of delivery in nulliparous Argentinean women : a qualitative study
D. Brennan, M. Robson, M. Murphy, C. O'Herlihy (2009)
Comparative analysis of international cesarean delivery rates using 10-group classification identifies significant variation in spontaneous labor.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 201 3
Luz Gibbons (survey development and data analysis)
(2011)
Retrieved from http://guida nce.nice. org.uk/CG132 . National Program of Statistics in Health
Raúl Mercer, Pablo Salgado, Celina Ocampo (2016)
The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014PLoS ONE, 11
Collaborators for the Feasibility of 'Mode of Delivery Trial' Study Group Study coordinating group: Dr
M. Aref‐Adib, E. Vlachodimitropoulou, R. Khasriya, B. Lamb, D. Selo-Ojeme (2018)
UK O&G trainees’ attitudes to caesarean delivery for maternal requestJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 38
T. Lavender, C. Kingdon, A. Hart, G. Gyte, M. Gabbay, J. Neilson (2005)
Could a randomised trial answer the controversy relating to elective caesarean section? National survey of consultant obstetricians and heads of midwiferyBMJ : British Medical Journal, 331
J. Dodd, Elizabeth Pearce, C. Crowther (2004)
Women's experiences and preferences following Caesarean birthAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 44
J. Rivo, M. Amyx, V. Pingray, R. Casale, A. Fiorillo, H. Krupitzki, J. Malamud, M. Mendilaharzu, M. Medina, AB Pino, L. Ribola, J. Schvartzman, G. Tartalo, M. Trasmonte, S. Varela, F. Althabe, J. Belizán, G. Cormick, N. Minckas, A. Becú, M. Berrueta, Luz Gibbons, Álvaro Ciganda, C. Stella, Paula Rubinstein, Karen Tapper, Nora Viergue, Mariana Piola, Mauricio Belizán, A. Pino, Pablo Quaranta, J. Malamud, Marianela Oriti, Gonzalo Molina, Patricia Ahumada, Elena Hurtado, Susana Gil, Inés Mirande, Laissa Avellaneda, María Moyano, Geanette aez, Carla Martín, Viviana Jaitt, Valentina Giraldez, Melina Julian, Antonella Quintana, Lourdes Bravo, Gabriela Mendez, Diego Rongetti, Lourdes Tarancón, Luciana Carrizo, Federico Coria, Analía Carrizo, oberto Casale, S. Varela, M. Trasmonte, Analia Mereles, Gabriela Violano, Milena Losardo, Vanina Lauphan, Yesica Lombardo (2018)
Obstetrical providers’ preferred mode of delivery and attitude towards non‐medically indicated caesarean sections: a cross‐sectional studyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 125
T. Anderson (2006)
Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term.The practising midwife, 9 8
J. Belizan, N. Minckas, E. Mcclure, S. Saleem, Janet Moore, S. Goudar, F. Esamai, Archana Patel, E. Chomba, A. Garcés, F. Althabe, Margo Harrison, N. Krebs, R. Derman, W. Carlo, E. Liechty, P. Hibberd, P. Buekens, R. Goldenberg (2018)
An approach to identify a minimum and rational proportion of caesarean sections in resource-poor settings: a global network studyThe Lancet. Global health, 6
Ethical issues in obstetrics and gynecology. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO)
Mark Lambert, Josephine Wood (2000)
Incorporating patient preferences into randomized trials.Journal of clinical epidemiology, 53 2
(2005)
versus planned cesarean birth
Hospital-based Co-investigator, Coordinator)
Z. Penn, P. Steer, A. Grant (1996)
A multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing elective and selective caesarean section for the delivery of the preterm breech infantBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 103
C. Kowalski, Adam Mrdjenovich (2013)
Patient Preference Clinical Trials: Why and When They Will Sometimes Be PreferredPerspectives in Biology and Medicine, 56
A. Betrán, M. Torloni, Jun Zhang, Jiangfeng Ye, R. Mikolajczyk, C. Deneux-Tharaux, O. Oladapo, J. Souza, Ö. Tunçalp, Joshua Vogel, A. Gülmezoglu (2015)
What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studiesReproductive Health, 12
Hospital-based Co-investigators)
A. Mazzoni, F. Althabe, L. Gutiérrez, L. Gibbons, N. Liu, A. Bonotti, G. Izbizky, Marta Ferrary, Nora Viergue, Silvia Vigil, Gabriela Denett, J. Belizan (2016)
Women’s preferences and mode of delivery in public and private hospitals: a prospective cohort studyBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 16
J. Lumley, A. Lester, P. Renou, C. Wood (1985)
A failed RCT to determine the best method of delivery for very low birth weight infants.Controlled clinical trials, 6 2
Instituto de la Maternidad y Ginecología Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes
K. Cooper, A. Grant, A. Garratt (1997)
The impact of using a partially randomised patient preference design when evaluating alternative managements for heavy menstrual bleedingBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 104
Jon Barrett, M. Hannah, E. Hutton, A. Willan, A. Allen, B. Armson, A. Gafni, K. Joseph, Dalah Mason, A. Ohlsson, S. Ross, J. Sanchez, E. Asztalos (2014)
A Randomized Trial of Planned Cesarean or Vaginal Delivery for Twin PregnancySurvey of Anesthesiology
Eman Alsayegh, Hayley Bos, Kim Campbell, J. Barrett (2018)
No. 361-Caesarean Delivery on Maternal Request.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC, 40 7
Sohinee Bhattacharya, Tao Wang, Fiona Knox (2006)
Analgesia for labour pain – analysis of the trends and associations in the Grampian region of Scotland between 1986 and 2001BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 6
L. McLeod, J. Barrett, S. Hewson, M. Hannah (2004)
Women's views regarding participation in a proposed randomized controlled trial of twin delivery.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC, 26 6
Karen Tapper (Coordinator qualitative phase)
(2012)
Rates of caesarean sections in two types of private hospitals: Restricted-access and open-access [Tasa de cesáreas en dos hospitales privados con normativas diferentes: abierto y cerrado
C. Brewin, C. Bradley (1989)
Patient preferences and randomised clinical trials.British Medical Journal, 299
B. Murray-Davis, J. Mcvittie, J. Barrett, E. Hutton (2016)
Exploring Women's Preferences for the Mode of Delivery in Twin Gestations: Results of the Twin Birth Study.Birth, 43 4
R. Wallace, B. Schifrin, R. Paul (1984)
The delivery route for very-low-birth-weight infants. A preliminary report of a randomized, prospective study.The Journal of reproductive medicine, 29 10
IntroductionThough interest is growing for trials comparing planned delivery mode (vaginal delivery [VD]; cesarean section [CS]) in low-risk nulliparous women, appropriate study design is unclear. Our objective was to assess feasibility of three designs (preference trial [PCT], randomized controlled trial [RCT], partially randomized patient preference trial [PRPPT]) for a trial comparing planned delivery mode in low-risk women.MethodsA cross-sectional survey of low-risk, nulliparous pregnant women (N = 416) and healthcare providers (N = 168) providing prenatal care and/or labor/delivery services was conducted in Argentina (2 public, 2 private hospitals). Proportion of pregnant women and providers willing to participate in each design and reasons for not participating were determined.ResultsFew women (< 15%) or professionals (33.3%) would participate in an RCT, though more would participate in PCTs (88% women; 65.9% professionals) or PRPPTs (44.4% public, 63.4% private sector women; 44.0% professionals). However, most women would choose vaginal delivery in the PCT and PRPPT (> 85%). Believing randomization unacceptable (RCT, PRPPT) and desiring choice of delivery mode (RCT) were women’s reasons for not participating. For providers, commonly cited reasons for not participating included unacceptability of performing CS without medical indication, difficulty obtaining informed consent, discomfort enrolling patients (all designs), and violating women’s right to choose (RCT).Conclusions for PracticeImportant limitations were found for each trial design evaluated. The necessity of stronger evidence regarding delivery mode in low-risk women suggests consideration of additional designs, such as a rigorously designed cohort study or an RCT within an obstetric population with equivocal CS indications.
Maternal and Child Health Journal – Springer Journals
Published: Jan 3, 2021
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.