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
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 | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | not assessable |
| Precision of results | not applicable |
| Directness | indirect |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | high |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
Egypt-specific Robson-group data.