WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 22 July 2015
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Vol. 123 (5), 667-670
- https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13526
Abstract
No abstract availableThis publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Googling caesarean section: a survey on the quality of the information available on the InternetBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2014
- China's 50% caesarean delivery rate: is it too high?BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2014
- A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve ItPLOS ONE, 2014
- What do popular Spanish women's magazines say about caesarean section? A 21‐year surveyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2014
- Methods of achieving and maintaining an appropriate caesarean section rateBest Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2013
- Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean sectionEmergencias, 2011
- Classifications for Cesarean Section: A Systematic ReviewPLOS ONE, 2011
- Women’s preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studiesBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2010
- Obstetricians' choice of cesarean delivery in ambiguous cases: is it influenced by risk attitude or fear of complaints and litigation?American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2009
- Classification of caesarean sectionsFetal and Maternal Medicine Review, 2001