{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,12,5]],"date-time":"2025-12-05T03:27:53Z","timestamp":1764905273193},"reference-count":37,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,12,1]],"date-time":"2006-12-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1164931200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/2.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,12,1]],"date-time":"2006-12-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1164931200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/2.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Health Serv Res"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Cesarean section rates is often used as an indicator of quality of care in maternity hospitals. The assumption is that lower rates reflect in developed countries more appropriate clinical practice and general better performances. Hospitals are thus often ranked on the basis of caesarean section rates.<\/jats:p>\n                <jats:p>The aim of this study is to assess whether the adjustment for clinical and sociodemographic variables of the mother and the fetus is necessary for inter-hospital comparisons of cesarean section (c-section) rates and to assess whether a risk adjustment model based on a limited number of variables could be identified and used.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Discharge abstracts of labouring women without prior cesarean were linked with abstracts of newborns discharged from 29 hospitals of the Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy) from 2003 to 2004. Adjusted ORs of cesarean by hospital were estimated by using two logistic regression models: 1) a full model including the potential confounders selected by a backward procedure; 2) a parsimonious model including only actual confounders identified by the \"change-in-estimate\" procedure. Hospital rankings, based on ORs were examined.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>24 risk factors for c-section were included in the full model and 7 (marital status, maternal age, infant weight, fetopelvic disproportion, eclampsia or pre-eclampsia, placenta previa\/abruptio placentae, malposition\/malpresentation) in the parsimonious model. Hospital ranking using the adjusted ORs from both models was different from that obtained using the crude ORs. The correlation between the rankings of the two models was 0.92. The crude ORs were smaller than ORs adjusted by both models, with the parsimonious ones producing more precise estimates.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Risk adjustment is necessary to compare hospital c-section rates, it shows differences in rankings and highlights inappropriateness of some hospitals. By adjusting for only actual confounders valid and more precise estimates could be obtained.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2006,8,15]],"date-time":"2006-08-15T18:14:38Z","timestamp":1155665678000},"update-policy":"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":24,"title":["Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"6","author":[{"given":"Maria P","family":"Fantini","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Elisa","family":"Stivanello","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Brunella","family":"Frammartino","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Anna P","family":"Barone","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Danilo","family":"Fusco","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Laura","family":"Dallolio","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Paolo","family":"Cacciari","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Carlo A","family":"Perucci","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2006,12,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"277_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"178","DOI":"10.1006\/pmed.1996.0044","volume":"25","author":"D Di Lallo","year":"1996","unstructured":"Di Lallo D, Perucci CA, Bertollini R, Mallone : Cesarean section rates by type of maternity unit and level of obstetric care: an area-based study in central Italy. Prev Med. 1996, 25: 178-185. 10.1006\/pmed.1996.0044.","journal-title":"Prev Med"},{"key":"277_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"621","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1998.tb10176.x","volume":"105","author":"CR Leitch","year":"1998","unstructured":"Leitch CR, Walker JJ: The rise in caesarean section rate: the same indications but a lower threshold. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998, 105: 621-626.","journal-title":"Br J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"key":"277_CR3","volume-title":"National Sentinel Cesarean Section Audit Report","author":"J Thomas","year":"2001","unstructured":"Thomas J, Paranjothy S: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. National Sentinel Cesarean Section Audit Report. 2001, RCOG Press"},{"key":"277_CR4","volume-title":"Cesarean Section, clinical guideline","author":"Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists","year":"2004","unstructured":"Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health Commissioned by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Cesarean Section, clinical guideline. 2004, London: RCOG Press"},{"key":"277_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"283","DOI":"10.1093\/intqhc\/11.4.283","volume":"11","author":"SB Kritchevsky","year":"1999","unstructured":"Kritchevsky SB, Braun BI, Gross PA, Newcomb CS, Kelleher CA, Simmons BP: Definition and adjustment of caesarean section rates and assessments of hospital performance. Int J Qual Health Care. 1999, 11: 283-291. 10.1093\/intqhc\/11.4.283.","journal-title":"Int J Qual Health Care"},{"key":"277_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1521","DOI":"10.1067\/mob.2001.115496","volume":"184","author":"KD Gregory","year":"2001","unstructured":"Gregory KD, Korst LM, Lawrence DP: Variation in elective primary caesarean delivery by patient and hospital factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001, 184: 1521-1531. 10.1067\/mob.2001.115496.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1223","DOI":"10.1016\/0277-9536(93)90334-Z","volume":"37","author":"El Shearer","year":"1993","unstructured":"Shearer El: Caesarean section: medical benefits and costs. Soc Science Medicine. 1993, 37: 1223-1231. 10.1016\/0277-9536(93)90334-Z.","journal-title":"Soc Science Medicine"},{"key":"277_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1968","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.279.24.1968","volume":"279","author":"DC Aron","year":"1998","unstructured":"Aron DC, Harper DL, Shepardson LB, Rosenthal GE: Impact of risk- adjusting cesarean delivery rates when reporting hospital performance. JAMA. 1998, 279: 1968-1972. 10.1001\/jama.279.24.1968.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"277_CR9","volume-title":"Risk Adjustment for measuring healthcare outcomes","author":"LI Iezzoni","year":"1997","unstructured":"Iezzoni LI: Risk Adjustment for measuring healthcare outcomes. 1997, Health Administration Press, 2","edition":"2"},{"key":"277_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"139","DOI":"10.1016\/S0301-2115(00)00302-X","volume":"94","author":"M Rabilloud","year":"2001","unstructured":"Rabilloud M, Ecochard R, Est\u00e8ve J: Maternity hospital ranking on prophylactic caesarian section rates: uncertainty associated with ranks. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001, 94: 139-144. 10.1016\/S0301-2115(00)00302-X.","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"277_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1425","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(99)70387-X","volume":"181","author":"JL Bailit","year":"1999","unstructured":"Bailit JL, Dooley SL, Peaceman AN: Risk adjustment for interhospital comparison of primary caesarean rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999, 181: 1425-1431. 10.1016\/S0002-9378(99)70387-X.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"598","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000149158.21586.58","volume":"105","author":"A Linton","year":"2005","unstructured":"Linton A, Peterson RP, Williams TV: Clinical Case Mix adjustment of caesarean delivery rates in US militaty hospitals, 2002. Obstet Gynecol. 2005, 105: 598-606.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"481","DOI":"10.1097\/00001703-200012000-00004","volume":"12","author":"KD Gregory","year":"2000","unstructured":"Gregory KD: Monitoring, risk adjustment and strategies to decrease caesarean rates. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2000, 12: 481-486. 10.1097\/00001703-200012000-00004.","journal-title":"Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR14","unstructured":"Arc\u00e0 M, Fusco D, Barone AP, Perucci CA: Risk adjustment and outcome research. Part I. Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine."},{"key":"277_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"631","DOI":"10.1136\/jech.54.8.631","volume":"54","author":"J Librero","year":"2000","unstructured":"Librero J, Peir\u00f2 S, Calderon SM: Interhospital variations in caesarean sections. A risk adjusted comparison in the Valencia public hospitals. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000, 54: 631-636. 10.1136\/jech.54.8.631.","journal-title":"J Epidemiol Community Health"},{"key":"277_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"751","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000157435.67138.78","volume":"105","author":"SF Meikle","year":"2005","unstructured":"Meikle SF, Steiner CA, Zhang J, Lawrence WL: A national estimate of the elective primary cesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gynecol. 2005, 105: 751-756.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"497","DOI":"10.1007\/s10654-005-5250-y","volume":"20","author":"A Capon","year":"2005","unstructured":"Capon A, Di Lallo D, Perucci CA, Panepuccia L: Case mix adjusted odds ratios as an alternative way to compare hospital performances. Eur J Epidemiol. 2005, 20: 497-500. 10.1007\/s10654-005-5250-y.","journal-title":"Eur J Epidemiol"},{"key":"277_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(98)00113-6","volume":"92","author":"E Lieberman","year":"1998","unstructured":"Lieberman E, Lang JM, Heffner LJ, Cohen A: Assessing the role of case mix in cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 1998, 92: 1-7. 10.1016\/S0029-7844(98)00113-6.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR19","volume-title":"Modern epidemiology","year":"1998","unstructured":"Rothman KJ, Greenland , eds: Modern epidemiology. 1998, Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven"},{"key":"277_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"340","DOI":"10.2105\/AJPH.79.3.340","volume":"79","author":"S Greenland","year":"1989","unstructured":"Greenland S: Modeling and variable selection in epidemiologic analysis. Am J Public Health. 1989, 79: 340-349.","journal-title":"Am J Public Health"},{"key":"277_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"125","DOI":"10.1093\/oxfordjournals.aje.a115101","volume":"129","author":"RM Mickey","year":"1989","unstructured":"Mickey RM: Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiology. 1989, 129: 125-137.","journal-title":"Am J Epidemiology"},{"key":"277_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"716","DOI":"10.1109\/TAC.1974.1100705","volume":"19","author":"H Akaike","year":"1974","unstructured":"Akaike H: A new look at the statistical identification model. IEEE Trans Auto Control. 1974, 19: 716-723. 10.1109\/TAC.1974.1100705.","journal-title":"IEEE Trans Auto Control"},{"key":"277_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"191","DOI":"10.1016\/S0033-3506(05)80052-6","volume":"109","author":"C Signorelli","year":"1995","unstructured":"Signorelli C, Cattaruzza MS, Osborn JF: Risk factors for caesarean section in Italy: Results of a multicentre study. Public Health. 1995, 109: 191-199. 10.1016\/S0033-3506(05)80052-6.","journal-title":"Public Health"},{"key":"277_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"273","DOI":"10.1016\/j.healthpol.2004.05.006","volume":"69","author":"M Khawaja","year":"2004","unstructured":"Khawaja M, Kabakian-Khasholian T, Jurdi R: Determinants of Cesarean section in Egypt: evidence from the demographic and health survey. Health Policy. 2004, 69: 273-281. 10.1016\/j.healthpol.2004.05.006.","journal-title":"Health Policy"},{"key":"277_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"800","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2004.01.051","volume":"191","author":"JL Bailit","year":"2004","unstructured":"Bailit JL, Love TE, Mercer B: Rising cesarean rates: are patients sicker?. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004, 191: 800-3. 10.1016\/j.ajog.2004.01.051.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR26","first-page":"200","volume":"81","author":"JF Peipert","year":"1993","unstructured":"Peipert JF, Bracken MB: Maternal age: an independent risk factor for cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1993, 81: 200-5.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"883","DOI":"10.1067\/mob.2001.117364","volume":"185","author":"JL Ecker","year":"2001","unstructured":"Ecker JL, Chen KT, Cohen AP, Riley LE, Lieberman ES: Increased risk of cesarean delivery with advancing maternal age: indications and associated factors in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001, 185: 883-7. 10.1067\/mob.2001.117364.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1178","DOI":"10.1111\/j.0001-6349.2004.00506.x","volume":"83","author":"Lin Herng-Ching","year":"2004","unstructured":"Herng-Ching Lin, Tzong-Chyi Sheen, Chao-Hsiun Tang, Senyeong Kao: Association between maternal age and the likelihood of a cesarean section: a population-based multivariate logistic regression analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004, 83: 1178-1183. 10.1111\/j.0001-6349.2004.00506.x.","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"key":"277_CR29","first-page":"511","volume":"32","author":"EB Keeler","year":"1997","unstructured":"Keeler EB, Park RE, Bell RM, Gifford GS, Keesey J: Adjusting caesarean delivery rates for case mix. Health Serv Res. 1997, 32: 511-528.","journal-title":"Health Serv Res"},{"key":"277_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"139","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(97)70452-6","volume":"177","author":"JP Elliott","year":"1997","unstructured":"Elliott JP, Russell MM, Dickason LA: The labor-adjusted caesarean section rate: a more informative method than the cesarean section \"rate\" for assessing a practitioner's labor and delivery skills. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997, 177: 139-143. 10.1016\/S0002-9378(97)70452-6.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1425","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(99)70387-X","volume":"181","author":"JC Glantz","year":"1999","unstructured":"Glantz JC: Caesarean delivery risk adjustment for regional interhospital comparisons. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999, 181: 1425-31. 10.1016\/S0002-9378(99)70387-X.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"277_CR32","unstructured":"Chun-Chyang Hsu , Guahn-Ren Shieh , Chuan-Song Wu , Hsi-che Shen , Chao-Hsiun Tang : Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparisons of caesarean section rates in Taipei municipal hospitals. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology."},{"key":"277_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"237","DOI":"10.1097\/00005650-200503000-00006","volume":"43","author":"LM Korst","year":"2005","unstructured":"Korst LM, Gornbein JA, Gregory KD: Rethinking the Cesarean Rate. How Pregnancy Complications May Affect Interhospital Comparisons. Med Care. 2005, 43: 237-245. 10.1097\/00005650-200503000-00006.","journal-title":"Med Care"},{"key":"277_CR34","first-page":"959","volume":"36","author":"DL DiGiuseppe","year":"2001","unstructured":"DiGiuseppe DL, Aron DC, Payne SM, Snow RJ, Dierker L, Rosenthal GE: Risk adjusting cesarean delivery rates: a comparison of hospital profiles based on medical record and birth certificate data. Health Serv Res. 2001, 36: 959-977.","journal-title":"Health Serv Res"},{"key":"277_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"763","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-123-10-199511150-00004","volume":"123","author":"LI Iezzoni","year":"1995","unstructured":"Iezzoni LI, Ash AS, Schwarz M, Daley J, Hughes JS, Mackiernan YD: Predicting who dies depends on how severity is measured: implications for evaluating patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 1995, 123: 763-770.","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"key":"277_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"112","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-3016.2003.00540.x","volume":"18","author":"LM Korst","year":"2004","unstructured":"Korst LM, Gregory KD, Gornbein JA: Elective primary cesarean delivery: accuracy of administrative data. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2004, 18: 112-119. 10.1111\/j.1365-3016.2003.00540.x.","journal-title":"Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol"},{"key":"277_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"443","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1994.03510300049037","volume":"271","author":"KM Parrish","year":"1994","unstructured":"Parrish KM, Holt VL, Easterling TR, Connell FA, LoGerfo JP: Effect of changes in maternal age, parity and birth weight distribution on primary caesarean delivery rates. JAMA. 1994, 271: 443-10.1001\/jama.271.6.443.","journal-title":"JAMA"}],"container-title":["BMC Health Services Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,27]],"date-time":"2021-07-27T18:23:55Z","timestamp":1627410235000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2006,12]]},"references-count":37,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,12]]}},"alternative-id":["277"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1472-6963-6-100","relation":{},"ISSN":["1472-6963"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1472-6963","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2006,12]]},"assertion":[{"value":"17 March 2006","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"15 August 2006","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"1 December 2006","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}}],"article-number":"100"}}