Cesarean section and maternal education; Secular trends in Norway, 1967-2004

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 86, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 840-848

  Tollånes, Mette C ^a   Thompson, John M D ^a,b   Daltveit, Anne K ^a   Irgens, Lorentz M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Cesarean section; Educational level; Norway; Secular trends

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH CERTIFICATE; BIRTH ORDER; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMERGENCY CARE; FEMALE; HEALTH EDUCATION; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; NORWAY; POPULATION BASED CASE CONTROL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREND STUDY;

ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT STUDIES; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HUMANS; NORWAY; PREGNANCY; RETROSPECTIVE MORAL JUDGMENT; RISK;

EID: 34447116375     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: 16000412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00016340701417422     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Lee S-I, Khang Y-H, Yun S, Jo M-W. Rising rates, changing relationships: caesarean section and its correlates in South Korea, 1988-2000. BJOG. 2005;112(6):810-9.
2. Medical Birth Registry of Norway. A°rsrapport/Annual Report, 2003/2004.
3. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=7412&Pos= 1&ColRank=2&Rank=272. Accessed June 2006.
4. Jackson N, Paterson-Brown S. Physical sequelae of caesarean section. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15(1):49-61.
5. Henderson J, McCandlish R, Kumiega L, Petrou S. Systematic review of economic aspects of alternative modes of delivery. BJOG. 2001;108(2):149-57.
6. Salam MT, Margolis HG, McConnell R, McGregor JA, Avol EL, Gilliland FD. Mode of delivery is associated with asthma and allergy occurrences in children. Ann Epidemiol. 2006;16(5):341-6.
7. Janowitz B, Rodrigues W, Covington DL, Arruda JM, Morris L. Cesarean delivery in northeast region of Brazil, 1978-80. Am J Public Health. 1985;75(5):560-2.
8. Gould JB, Davey B, Stafford RS. Socioeconomic differences in rates of cesarean section. N Engl J Med. 1989;321(4):233-9.
9. Hurst M, Summey PS. Childbirth and social class: the case of cesarean delivery. Soc Sci Med. 1984;18(8):621-31.
10. Parazzini F, Priotta N, La Vecchia C, Fedele L. Determinants of caesarean section rates in Italy. BJOG. 1992;99(3):203-6.
11. Linton A, Peterson MR, Williams TV. Effects of maternal characteristics on cesarean delivery rates among U.S. Department of Defense healthcare beneficiaries, 1996-2002. Birth. 2004;31(1):3-11.
12. King DE, Lahiri K. Socioeconomic factors and the odds of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. JAMA. 1994;272(7):524-9.
13. Guihard P, Blondel B. Trends in risk factors for caesarean sections in France between 1981 and 1995: lessons for reducing the rates in the future. BJOG. 2001;108(1):48-55.
14. Irgens L. The Medical Birth Registry of Norway. Epidemiological research and surveillance throughout 30 years. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79(6):435-9.
15. Skjaerven R, Gjessing HK, Bakketeig LS. Birthweight by gestational age in Norway. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79(6):440-9.
16. Borthen I, Lossius P, Skjaerven R, Bergsjø P. Changes in frequency and indications for cesarean section in Norway 1967-1984. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1989;68(7):589-93.
17. Lie RT, Heuch I, Irgens LM. Maximum likelihood estimation of the proportion of congenital malformations using double registration systems. Biometrics. 1994;50(2):433-44.
18. Rasmussen S, Albrechtsen S, Irgens LM, Dalaker K, Maartmann-Moe H, Vlatkovic L, et al. Unexplained antepartum fetal death in Norway, 1995-97: diagnostic validation and some epidemiologic aspects. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003;82(2):109-15.
19. Skomsvoll JF, Østensen M, Baste V, Irgens LM. Validity of a rheumatic disease diagnosis in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;81(9):831-4.
20. Clausen T, Øyen N, Henriksen T. Pregnancy complications by overweight and residential area. A prospective study of an urban Norwegian cohort. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(5):526-33.
21. Vahratian A, Siega-Riz AM, Savitz DA, Zhang J. Maternal pre-pregnancy overweight and obesity and the risk of cesarean delivery in nulliparous women. Ann Epidemiol. 2005;15(7):467-74.
22. Robinson HE, O'Connell CM, Joseph KS, McLeod NL. Maternal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by obesity. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(6):1357-64.
23. Sarlio-Lähteenkorva S, Lissau I, Lahelma E. The social patterning of relative body weight and obesity in Denmark and Finland. Eur J Public Health. 2006;16(1):36-40.
24. Delvaux T, Buekens P, Godin I, Boutsen M. Barriers to prenatal care in Europe. Am J Prev Med. 2001;21(1):52-9.
25. Backe B. Overutilization of antenatal care in Norway. Scand J Public Health. 2001;29(2):129-32.
26. Leigh JP. Direct and indirect effects of education on health. Soc Sci Med. 1983;17(4):227-34.
27. Kramer MS, Séguin L, Lydon J, Goulet L. Socio-economic disparities in pregnancy outcome: why do the poor fare so poorly? Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2000;14(3):194-210.
28. Lund KE, Lund M. Røyking og sosial ulikhet i Norge [Smoking and social inequality in Norway] (in Norwegian with English abstract). Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2005;125(5):560-3.
29. England L, Zhang J. Smoking and risk of preeclampsia: a systematic review. Front Biosci. 2007;12:2471-83.
30. Reddy UM, Branum AM, Klebanoff MA. Relationship of maternal body mass index and height to twinning. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(3):593-7.