Author
Listed:
- Camille Etcheverry
- Ana Pilar Betrán
- Marion Ravit
- Charles Kaboré
- Pisake Lumbiganon
- Guillermo Carroli
- Quoc Nhu Hung Mac
- Celina Gialdini
- Alexandre Dumont
- the QUALI-DEC research group
Abstract
Introduction: Maternal request for caesarean section has often been cited to justify the increasing caesarean section rates worldwide. However, we lack evidence on the impact of women’s preference for caesarean section on this dramatic tendency. Given the need to develop appropriate strategies to reduce unnecessary caesarean section, the objective of this study was to assess the association between women’s preference for caesarean section and its actual use, and to estimate the proportion of caesarean section associated with women’s preference for caesarean section in Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand and Viet Nam. Methods: A cross-sectional hospital-based survey among postpartum women was conducted in 32 hospitals (8 per country) between 2020 and 2022. We selected women with no potential medical indication for caesarean section among a random sample of women who delivered in participating facilities during the data collection period. We chose a propensity score matching approach, to compare the probability of giving birth by caesarean section between women who, late in pregnancy, preferred caesarean section and those who preferred vaginal birth. Results: A total of 1,827 low-risk women were included, of whom 10.4% preferred a caesarean section and the average caesarean section rate was 24.5%. The results show that, on average, preference for caesarean section increased the probability of having a caesarean section by 32% (CI 95% [0.23–0.41]; p
Suggested Citation
Camille Etcheverry & Ana Pilar Betrán & Marion Ravit & Charles Kaboré & Pisake Lumbiganon & Guillermo Carroli & Quoc Nhu Hung Mac & Celina Gialdini & Alexandre Dumont & the QUALI-DEC research group, 2025.
"Contribution of women’s preference to the overuse of caesarean sections: A propensity score matching analysis based on a multi-country cross-sectional survey, as part of the QUALI-DEC project,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(12), pages 1-19, December.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0339007
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339007
Download full text from publisher
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:pone00:0339007. 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.