Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/33355
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTorloni, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
dc.contributor.authorBetran, Ana Pilar
dc.contributor.authorSouza, Joao Paulo
dc.contributor.authorWidmer, Mariana
dc.contributor.authorAllen, Tomas
dc.contributor.authorGulmezoglu, Metin
dc.contributor.authorMerialdi, Mario
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-24T14:06:03Z-
dc.date.available2016-01-24T14:06:03Z-
dc.date.issued2011-01-20
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
dc.identifier.citationPlos One. San Francisco: Public Library Science, v. 6, n. 1, 10 p., 2011.
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/33355-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Rising cesarean section (CS) rates are a major public health concern and cause worldwide debates. To propose and implement effective measures to reduce or increase CS rates where necessary requires an appropriate classification. Despite several existing CS classifications, there has not yet been a systematic review of these. This study aimed to 1) identify the main CS classifications used worldwide, 2) analyze advantages and deficiencies of each system.Methods and Findings: Three electronic databases were searched for classifications published 1968-2008. Two reviewers independently assessed classifications using a form created based on items rated as important by international experts. Seven domains (ease, clarity, mutually exclusive categories, totally inclusive classification, prospective identification of categories, reproducibility, implementability) were assessed and graded. Classifications were tested in 12 hypothetical clinical case-scenarios. From a total of 2948 citations, 60 were selected for full-text evaluation and 27 classifications identified. Indications classifications present important limitations and their overall score ranged from 2-9 (maximum grade = 14). Degree of urgency classifications also had several drawbacks (overall scores 6-9). Woman-based classifications performed best (scores 5-14). Other types of classifications require data not routinely collected and may not be relevant in all settings (scores 3-8).Conclusions: This review and critical appraisal of CS classifications is a methodologically sound contribution to establish the basis for the appropriate monitoring and rational use of CS. Results suggest that women-based classifications in general, and Robson's classification, in particular, would be in the best position to fulfill current international and local needs and that efforts to develop an internationally applicable CS classification would be most appropriately placed in building upon this classification. the use of a single CS classification will facilitate auditing, analyzing and comparing CS rates across different settings and help to create and implement effective strategies specifically targeted to optimize CS rates where necessary.en
dc.format.extent10
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherPublic Library Science
dc.relation.ispartofPlos One
dc.rightsAcesso aberto
dc.titleClassifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic Reviewen
dc.typeArtigo
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.contributor.institutionBrazilian Cochrane Ctr
dc.contributor.institutionWorld Hlth Org
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Obstet, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationBrazilian Cochrane Ctr, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.description.affiliationWorld Hlth Org, Dept Reprod Hlth & Res, Geneva, Switzerland
dc.description.affiliationWorld Hlth Org, Dept Knowledge Management & Sharing, Geneva, Switzerland
dc.description.affiliationUnifespUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Obstet, São Paulo, Brazil
dc.identifier.fileWOS000286522200007.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0014566
dc.description.sourceWeb of Science
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000286522200007
Appears in Collections:Em verificação - Geral

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
WOS000286522200007.pdf154 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.