IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0213352.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How is women’s demand for caesarean section measured? A systematic literature review

Author

Listed:
  • Clémence Schantz
  • Myriam de Loenzien
  • Sophie Goyet
  • Marion Ravit
  • Aurélien Dancoisne
  • Alexandre Dumont

Abstract

Background: Caesarean section rates are increasing worldwide, and since the 2000s, several researchers have investigated women’s demand for caesarean sections. Question: The aim of this article was to review and summarise published studies investigating caesarean section demand and to describe the methodologies, outcomes, country characteristics and country income levels in these studies. Methods: This is a systematic review of studies published between 2000 and 2017 in French and English that quantitatively measured women’s demand for caesarean sections. We carried out a systematic search using the Medline database in PubMed. Findings: The search strategy identified 390 studies, 41 of which met the final inclusion criteria, representing a total sample of 3 774 458 women. We identified two different study designs, i.e., cross-sectional studies and prospective cohort studies, that are commonly used to measure social demand for caesarean sections. Two different types of outcomes were reported, i.e., the preferences of pregnant or non-pregnant women regarding the method of childbirth in the future and caesarean delivery following maternal request. No study measured demand for caesarean section during the childbirth process. All included studies were conducted in middle- (n = 24) and high-income countries (n = 17), and no study performed in a low-income country was found. Discussion: Measuring caesarean section demand is challenging, and the structural violence leading to demand for caesarean section during childbirth while in the labour ward remains invisible. In addition, the caesarean section demand in low-income countries remains unclear due to the lack of studies conducted in these countries. Conclusion: We recommend conducting prospective cohort studies to describe the social construction of caesarean section demand. We also recommend conducting studies in low-income countries because demand for caesarean sections in these countries is rarely investigated.

Suggested Citation

  • Clémence Schantz & Myriam de Loenzien & Sophie Goyet & Marion Ravit & Aurélien Dancoisne & Alexandre Dumont, 2019. "How is women’s demand for caesarean section measured? A systematic literature review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213352
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213352
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213352&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0213352?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213352. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.