ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Association of inter-delivery interval and the success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in high-risk women: a population-based study in the US.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCompared to a repeat cesarean section, vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) offers potential health benefits. While inter-delivery interval (IDI) may influence VBAC success, its specific impact in high-risk women remains unclear.
methodsThis population-based cross-sectional study utilized data from the US National Vital Statistics System from 2016 to 2018, including women with a prior cesarean and a current singleton live birth. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.
resultsAmong 673,005 high-risk women, 96,479 underwent a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), with 64,167 (66.5%) achieving VBAC. In adjusted analysis, each additional month of IDI was associated with a 0.3% higher odds of VBAC failure (aOR 1.003, 95%CI 1.002–1.003). Using categorical intervals, IDI of 24–59 months and ≥ 60 months were associated with 6.1% (aOR 1.061, 95%CI 1.016–1.108) and 25.9% (aOR 1.259, 95%CI 1.202–1.319) higher odds of failure, respectively, compared to 18–23 months. IDI ≤ 5 or 6–11 months showed no significant association.
conclusionsA longer IDI, particularly ≥ 60 months, is an independent risk factor for VBAC failure among high-risk women.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.