Primary care screening vs secondary care screening: Caesarean section
Primary care screening showed no clear difference in caesarean birth compared with secondary care screening (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary care screening vs secondary care screening Caesarean birth · pregnant women, excluding women already diagnosed with GDM in this pregnancy and those with pre‐existing diabetes… Primary care screening showed no clear difference in caesarean birth compared with secondary care screening (low certainty). Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus based on different risk profiles and settings for improving… (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1 [0.8, 1.27] | 1 study · 690 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus based on different risk profiles and settings for improving maternal and infant health 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.