Variations in caesarean section outcome reporting in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Objective
To explore the variation and quality of the outcomes reported using descriptive analysis and interactive network visualisation of CS outcomes of comparative studies conducted in low-and middle-income settings.
Study Design
Systematic review of comparative studies to reduce caesarean section complications in low- and middle-income countries and outcome assessment using the modified Harman questionnaire, assessing for the presence of a clear primary outcome, an explanation of how the outcomes were analysed and a description of the methods used to enhance the quality of these measures.
Results
102 comparative studies were included. Studies of interventions to improve maternal and perinatal outcomes after caesarean section reported 466 outcomes with 15 % of these outcomes appearing only once across the outcomes reviewed (n = 73). The most common outcome categories reported were maternal death, disability and bleeding. Psychological and injury outcomes were less commonly reported. The overall quality of outcome reporting varied between studies but was particularly low for reporting on methods to improve outcome measures. Very few outcomes scored a maximum of three points when assessed according to the modified Harman score, with only 15 of the primary outcomes (16 %) achieving 3 points and 40 of the secondary outcomes (11 %) achieving 3 points. The median quality of reporting was 2 (range 0, 3) for all outcomes, for a maximum score of 3. Quality of outcome reporting was associated with the type of outcome (primary or secondary), the region in which the study was conducted in, and journal characteristics such as impact factor and journal type.
Conclusions
There was wide variability in both the outcomes reported and the frequency in which they were reported. Overall, very few primary and secondary outcomes achieved the maximum score of three on the modified Harman score, highlighting the need for a core outcome set for caesarean section intervention trials to improve the consistency and synergy of future research outcome definition, measurement and synthesis.

Contributors

Amie Wilson, Harpreet Kaur, Ahmed Ali Hassan, Bernard Mbwele, Soha Sobhy, Gabriel Ruiz Calvo, Sergio Olmos PiƱero, Javier Zamora, Shakila Thangaratinam

Publication

Journal: European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume: 307
Issue:
Pages: 61 - 70
Year: 2025
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2025.01.039

Further Study Information

Current Stage: Completed
Date:
Funding source(s): This study was funded by the Medical Research Council, research grant MR/V035282/1. The funding body had no input in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data or in writing the manuscript.


Health Area

Disease Category: Pregnancy & childbirth

Disease Name: enhanced cesarean delivery recovery

Target Population

Age Range: 18 - 120

Sex: Female

Nature of Intervention: Surgery

Stakeholders Involved

Study Type

- Systematic review of outcomes measured in trials

Method(s)

- Systematic review

Systematic review of comparative studies to reduce caesarean section complications in low- and middle-income countries and outcome assessment using the modified Harman questionnaire, assessing for the presence of a clear primary outcome, an explanation of how the outcomes were analysed and a description of the methods used to enhance the quality of these measures.