↓ Skip to main content

Why Equitable Access to Vaginal Birth Requires Abolition of Race-Based Medicine.

Overview of attention for article published in The AMA Journal of Ethic, March 2022
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Why Equitable Access to Vaginal Birth Requires Abolition of Race-Based Medicine.
Published in
The AMA Journal of Ethic, March 2022
DOI 10.1001/amajethics.2022.233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas Rubashkin

Abstract

In 2010, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network developed a decision aid, the Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) calculator, to help clinicians discern how one variable (race) might influence patients' success in delivering a baby vaginally following a prior birth by cesarean. The higher rate of cesarean deliveries among Black and Hispanic women in the United States has long demonstrated racial inequities in obstetrical care, however. Although the MFMU's new VBAC calculator no longer includes race or ethnicity, in response to calls for abolition of race-based medicine, this article argues that VBAC calculator use has never been race neutral. In fact, VBAC calculator use in the United States is laced with racism, compromises patients' autonomy, and undermines informed consent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 12%
Unspecified 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 9 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 12%
Unspecified 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 65%