↓ Skip to main content

Early versus Late Admission to Labor Affects Labor Progression and Risk of Cesarean Section in Nulliparous Women

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Early versus Late Admission to Labor Affects Labor Progression and Risk of Cesarean Section in Nulliparous Women
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2016.00026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rafael T. Mikolajczyk, Jun Zhang, Jagteshwar Grewal, Linda C. Chan, Antje Petersen, Mechthild M. Gross

Abstract

Rates of cesarean section increase worldwide, and the components of this increase are partially unknown. A strong role is prescribed to dystocia, and at the same time, the diagnosis of dystocia is highly subjective. Previous studies indicated that risk of cesarean is higher when women are admitted to the hospital early in the labor. We examined data on 1,202 nulliparous women with singleton, vertex pregnancies and spontaneous labor onset. We selected three groups based on cervical dilatation at admission: early (0.5-1.5 cm, N = 178), intermediate (2.5-3.5 cm, N = 320), and late (4.5-5.5 cm, N = 175). The Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to analyze the risk of delivery by cesarean section at a given dilatation, and thin-plate spline regression with a binary outcome (R library gam) to assess the form of the associations between the cesarean section in either the first or second stage versus vaginal delivery and dilatation at admission. Women who were admitted to labor early had a higher risk of delivery by cesarean section (18 versus 4% in the late admission group), while the risk of instrumental delivery did not differ (24 versus 24%). Before 4 cm dilatation, the earlier a woman was admitted to labor, the higher was her risk of delivery by cesarean section. After 4 cm dilatation, however, the relationship disappeared. These patterns were true for both first and second stage cesarean deliveries. Oxytocin use was associated with a higher risk of cesarean section only in the middle group (2.5-3.5 cm dilatation at admission). Early admission to labor was associated with a significantly higher risk of delivery by cesarean section during the first and second stages. Differential effects of oxytocin augmentation depending on dilation at admission may suggest that admission at the early stage of labor is an indicator rather than a risk factor itself, but admission at the intermediate stage (2.5-3.5 cm) becomes a risk factor itself. Further research is needed to study this hypothesis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 23%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Professor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 29%
Mathematics 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 19 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 June 2021.
All research outputs
#843,791
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#206
of 5,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,829
of 352,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,694 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.