Ecological studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-ORG-111 standard review

Caesarean rates around the world

Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates.

Overview

Betran AP et al.. BMJ Glob Health 2021 · PMID 34130991 · DOI 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671

About 1 in 5 births worldwide is by caesarean; in Egypt it is about half of all births, one of the highest rates globally.

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Describe global caesarean trends

How was the study done?

Analysis of national data from 154 countries

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

94.5% of world births

What was actually found?

21.1% global rate; Egypt 51.8%

How large was the observed effect?

n/a

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Caesarean is likely overused in some countries such as Egypt

What are the study's limitations?

Data quality varies

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports concern about overuse; not refusal of all caesareans

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Europe also included

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Does not show which individual caesareans were unnecessary

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Betran AP et al.
Journal
BMJ Glob Health
Year
2021
Identifier
PMID 34130991 DOI 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

Non-commercial support (PubMed); details not read.

2. Research question

Current global and regional CS rates, trends since 1990 and projections to 2030.

3. Study design and population

Study design
Ecological study – Global analysis of nationally representative CS rate data with trend analysis and ARIMA projections
Population

Live births in 154 countries

Country

Global

Period

1990-2018; projections to 2030

Sample size

154 countries covering 94.5% of world live births

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Nationally representative data (routine systems, household surveys)

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Calendar time / region

Comparator

Regions

Endpoints

CS rate

Statistical methods

Weighted averages, piecewise trend analysis, ARIMA projections

5. Actual results

Results

21.1% of women gave birth by caesarean worldwide (2010-2018), from 5% in sub-Saharan Africa to 42.8% in Latin America and the Caribbean. Greatest increases in Eastern Asia, Western Asia and Northern Africa (44.9, 34.7 and 31.5 percentage points). Projected 28.5% worldwide by 2030. Results section of the open full text: Egypt had the fourth-highest CS rate worldwide (51.8%) and showed an increase of more than 50 percentage points over the period.

Absolute risks

Egypt 51.8% vs world 21.1%.

Authors' conclusion

CS use has steadily increased worldwide; unmet need and overuse coexist and must both be addressed.

6. Strengths

  • Near-global coverage
  • Nationally representative sources

7. Weaknesses

  • Mixed data sources and years
  • No outcome data

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
none applicable
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
not assessable
Rationale

Descriptive surveillance analysis.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Descriptive; Egypt figure from the results text of the open full text.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Shows that caesarean overuse is real and that Egypt has one of the highest rates in the world.

11. Independent contrary findings

WHO statement: necessary CS saves lives.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Includes European rates (Romania highest in Europe at 46.9%).

13. Overall methodological judgement

Supports concern about excessive caesarean use, especially in Egypt; says nothing in favour of refusing indicated caesareans.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biasnot assessable
Precision of resultsnot applicable
Directnessindirect
Reproducibilityreplicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Egypt-specific Robson-group data.

15. Linked fact checks