ArticleHealth policy and planning2026
Dynamic and heterogeneous impacts of granting and revoking elective c-section rights in São Paulo.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Elective caesarean sections (c-sections) present a significant public health challenge due to associated health risks and increased costs. This study examines the causal impacts of a unique natural experiment in São Paulo, Brazil: Law 17,137/2019, which temporarily allowed pregnant women to opt for c-sections in public healthcare facilities. Using a difference-in-differences estimator, we analyse the Law's effects on c-section rates across various hospital types, municipal characteristics, and demographics. The Law led to a significant and immediate 3.03% point increase in c-section rates in public hospitals. Notably, this effect was limited to the public sector, with no consistent changes observed in private or mixed facilities. The impact was also temporary; following the Law's revocation less than a year later, c-section rates promptly reverted to pre-enactment levels, indicating no lasting effects. We find no evidence that the Law shifted deliveries from paid private care to free public hospitals. Our analysis reveals heterogeneous impacts, with the largest increases in c-section rates occurring in municipalities that had lower baseline c-section rates, a greater reliance on public healthcare, and fewer healthcare resources. These findings suggest that the law disproportionately affected areas with greater public health system strain. Interestingly, the increase in c-sections primarily occurred among low-risk births and had no detectable effect on newborn health outcomes, such as birth weight or Apgar scores. The additional 4500 c-sections performed under the law created an added fiscal burden of approximately R$459 000 for the public health system, based on the cost difference between vaginal and c-section deliveries. This study underscores that while granting elective choice may seem empowering, it can lead to a surge in unnecessary, costly, and riskier procedures, highlighting the crucial need to consider both equity and resource implications when designing healthcare policies.
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.