Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Maternal and foetal outcomes following natural vaginal versus caesarean section (c‐section) delivery in women with bleeding disorders and carriers

Information

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011059.pub4Copy DOI
Database:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Version published:
  1. 09 December 2021see what's new
Type:
  1. Intervention
Stage:
  1. Review
Cochrane Editorial Group:
  1. Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Article metrics

Altmetric:

Cited by:

Cited 0 times via Crossref Cited-by Linking

Collapse

Authors

  • Laxminarayan Karanth

    Correspondence to: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Melaka-Manipal Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Melaka, Malaysia

    [email protected]

  • Adinegara BL Abas

    Department of Community Medicine, Melaka-Manipal Medical College (Manipal Academy of Higher Education), Melaka, Malaysia

Contributions of authors

 Roles and responsibilities

TASK

WHO WILL UNDERTAKE THE TASK?

Protocol stage: draft the protocol

Karanth KL

Review stage: select which trials to include (2)

Karanth KL, Adinegara BL Abas

Review stage: extract data from trials (2 people)

Karanth KL, Adinegara BL Abas

Review stage: enter data into RevMan

Karanth KL

Review stage: carry out the analysis

Karanth KL, Adinegara BL Abas

Review stage: interpret the analysis

Karanth KL

Review stage: draft the final review

Karanth KL, Adinegara BL Abas

Update stage: update the review

Karanth KL, Adinegara BL Abas

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • No sources of support provided

External sources

  • National Institute for Health Research, UK

    This systematic review was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group.

Declarations of interest

Both authors: none known.

Acknowledgements

We thank the management of Melaka Manipal Medical College, Melaka, Malaysia, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India for giving us the opportunity to be involved in the development of this protocol.

The authors would like to thank Tracey Remmington of the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group for the help and support during the course of this review.

This project was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health.

We would like to thank Professor Sachchithanantham Kanagasabai for his contribution to versions of the review prior to the 2020 update (Karanth 2014; Karanth 2015; Karanth 2017).

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2021 Dec 09

Maternal and foetal outcomes following natural vaginal versus caesarean section (c‐section) delivery in women with bleeding disorders and carriers

Review

Laxminarayan Karanth, Adinegara BL Abas

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011059.pub4

2017 Aug 04

Maternal and foetal outcomes following natural vaginal versus caesarean section (c‐section) delivery in women with bleeding disorders and carriers

Review

Laxminarayan Karanth, Sachchithanantham Kanagasabai, Adinegara BL Abas

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011059.pub3

2015 Apr 03

Maternal and foetal outcomes following natural vaginal versus caesarean section (c‐section) delivery in women with bleeding disorders and carriers

Review

Laxminarayan Karanth, Sachchithanantham Kanagasabai, Adinegara BL Abas

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011059.pub2

2014 Apr 09

Maternal and foetal outcomes following natural vaginal versus caesarean section (c‐section) delivery in carriers and women with bleeding disorders

Protocol

Laxminarayan Karanth, Sachchithanantham Kanagasabai, Adinegara BL Abas

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011059

Differences between protocol and review

We have added a section on 'Summary of findings and assessment of the certainty of the evidence' to the review.

Keywords

MeSH

Medical Subject Headings Check Words

Female; Humans; Infant; Pregnancy;

PICOs

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

The PICO model is widely used and taught in evidence-based health care as a strategy for formulating questions and search strategies and for characterizing clinical studies or meta-analyses. PICO stands for four different potential components of a clinical question: Patient, Population or Problem; Intervention; Comparison; Outcome.

See more on using PICO in the Cochrane Handbook.