Making sense of rising caesarean section rates. Editorial. The British Medical Journal 2004; 329:696-697.

Choose your font:
✓ Arimo
➡ Merriweather
➡ Mukta Malar
➡ Open Sans Condensed
➡ Rokkitt
➡ Source Sans Pro

✓ English
➡ Français
➡ Português
➡ Español

	Database - (CIANE)
Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website) Currently 3111 records ➡ YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=904 Created on : 04 Oct 2004 Modified on : 01 Dec 2007	➡ Modify this record Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password! Share: Easy
Bibliographical entry (without author) :	Making sense of rising caesarean section rates. Editorial. The British Medical Journal 2004; 329:696-697.
Author(s) :	Anderson GM.
Year of publication :	2004
URL(s) :	http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/74…
Résumé (français) :
Abstract (English) :	In Canada and the United States the appropriate role of caesarean section was an important women’s issue, a topic for research on patterns of use, and a target of professionally endorsed guidelines in the early 1980s. Two decades later women, researchers, and the medical establishment are once again debating the use of this procedure. … Three specific indications—fetal distress, dystocia, and previous caesarean section—account for most caesarean sections.1 We have little evidence from controlled trials on the risks and benefits of caesarean section for these indications. One obvious goal is to support large, well designed, randomised trials that could help define appropriate care for these common indications. However, trials take time, and in the short term decisions for individual patients and for health systems will have to be made in the face of uncertainty about the risks and benefits of caesarean section compared with vaginal delivery. Another goal should therefore be to have a more comprehensive and frank debate about the ethical issues related to the role of doctors, preferences of patients, and informed consent with respect to caesarean sections.
Sumário (português) :
Resumen (español) :
Comments :
Argument (français) :
Argument (English):
Argumento (português):
Argumento (español):
Keywords :	➡ c-section/caesarean ; ethics ; deontology ; informed consent
Author of this record :	Cécile Loup — 04 Oct 2004 ➡ latest update : Bernard Bel — 01 Dec 2007

	Discussion (display only in English)

➡ Only identified users Click “login” on the top right to sign in or create your account I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms
[Hide guidelines] ➡ Discussion guidelines 1) Comments aim at clarifying the content of the publication or suggesting links for a better comprehension of its topic 2) All comments are public and opinions expressed belong to their authors 3) Avoid casual talk and personal stories 4) Any off-topic comment or containing inappropriate statements will be deleted without notice

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
➡ Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
➡ Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.

Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth