Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section
References
Additional references
Althabe F, Belizan JM, Villar J, Alexander S, Bergel E, Ramos S, et al. Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: a cluster randomised control trial. Lancet 2004;363:1934‐40.
Belizan JM, Althabe F, Barros F, Alexander S. Rate and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999;319:1397‐402.
BEMFAN. Brasil, Pesquisa Nacional sobre Demografia e Saude ‐ 1996. Rio de Janeiro: BEMFAM, 1997.
Cai WW, Marks JS, Chen CH, Zhuang YX, Morris L, Harris JR. Increased cesarean section rate and emerging patterns of health insurance in Shanghai, China. American Journal of Public Health 1998;88:777‐80.
Draper N, Smith H. Applied Regression Analysis. New York: Wiley, 1981.
Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group. The Data Collection Checklist2002.
Goverment Statistical Service. NHS Maternity Statistics, England 1995‐1996 to 1997‐1998. London: Goverment Statistical Service, 2001.
Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Review. The Cochrane Library 2003, Issue 4.
International Cesarean Awareness Network. White Papers: cesarean fact sheet. International Cesarean Awareness Network2002.
Jamtvedt G, Young JM, Kristoffersen DT, Thomson O'Brien MA, Oxman AD. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Cochrane Review). The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 4.
Laird NM, Mosteller F. Some statistical methods for combining experimental results. Int J Tech Assess in Health Care. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 1990;6:5‐30.
Macfarlane A, Mugford M, Henderson J, Furtado A, Stevens J, Dunn A. Birth counts: statistics of pregnancy and childbirth. London: The Stationery Office, 2000.
Mayor S. Caesarean section rate in England reaches 22%. BMJ 2002;324:1118.
Murray SF. Relation between private health insurance and high rates of caesarean section in Chile: qualitative and quantitative study. BMJ 2000;321:1501‐5.
National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health. Caesarean section. London: RCOG Press, 2004.
Norton FC, Placek PJ, Taffel SM. Comparisons of national cesarean‐section rates. New England Journal of Medicine 1987;316:386‐9.
Notzon FC, Cnattingius S, Bergsjo P, Cole S, Taffel S, Irgens L. Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparision by indication. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1994;170:495‐504.
John Wiley & Sons. Review Manager (RevMan) Version 4.2 for Windows. John Wiley & Sons, Oxford, England: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2004.
Teerawattananon Y, Tangcharoeansathien V, Srirattana S, Tipyasothi P. Twelve years of pattern of hospital delivery in Thailand:1990‐2001: a national survey. Journal of Health Science 2003;12(1):1‐18.
Thomas J, Paranjothy S. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effective Support Unit. National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. 1 edition. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 2001.
Ukoumunne OC, Gulliford MC, Chinn S, Sterne JA, Burney PG. Methods for evaluating area‐wide and organisation‐based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review. Health Technology Assessment 1999;3:iii‐92.
Walker R, Turnbull D, Wilkinson C. Strategies to address global cesarean section rates: A review of the evidence. Birth 2002;29:28‐39.
Wu W. Cesarean delivery in Shantou, China : a retrospective analysis of 1922 women. Birth 2000;27:86‐90.
Zwarenstein M, Reeves S, Barr H, Hammick M, Koppel I, Atkins J. Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Cochrane Review). The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 4.
