- M Joffe
- Academic Department of Public Health, St Mary's Hospital Medical School, London W2 1PG
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB9 2ZD.
EDITOR, - The controversy over the optimal rate of caesarean section continues1,2 in the absence of clear evidence on the relative benefit of higher or lower rates. There is a large literature on the variation in rates, but this is mostly concerned with its determinants3,4 rather than the more fundamental question: what difference does it make?
Craig R Leitch and James J Walker state a commonly held view - that the focus of study should be the reasons or indications for caesarean section.2 Yet, as they also state on the basis of their unit's experience over 30 years, a large difference in caesarean section rates (7% rising to 17%, judging from their figure) is compatible with the absence of change in the most common indications, failure to progress and fetal distress. Both these indications are continuous variables, so it is …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012