Identifying factors associated with adolescents’ Intention for childbirth

1Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP & Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ global health, 6(6), e005671, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671 Betran AP Ye J Moller AB Souza JP & Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates BMJ global health, 66 e005671 2021 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671Search in Google Scholar

2Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, Mola G, Visser GH, Homer CS, et al. Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet. 2018;392(10155): 1349-1357. https://doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5 Sandall J Tribe RM Avery L Mola G Visser GH Homer CS et al Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children Lancet 201839210155 1349 1357 https://doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5Search in Google Scholar

3Linton A, Peterson MR, Williams TV. Effects of maternal characteristics on caesarean delivery rates among U.S. Department of Defense healthcare beneficiaries, 1996-2002. Birth. 2004;1:3-11. https://doi:10.1111/j.0730-7659.2004.0268 Linton A Peterson MR Williams TV Effects of maternal characteristics on caesarean delivery rates among U.S. Department of Defense healthcare beneficiaries, 1996-2002 Birth 200413 11 https://doi:10.1111/j.0730-7659.2004.0268Search in Google Scholar

4Ionescu CA, Dimitriu M, Poenaru E, Bănacu M, Furău GO, Navolan D & Ples L. Defensive caesarean section: A reality and a recommended health care improvement for Romanian obstetrics. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice. 2019;25(1), 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13025 Ionescu CA Dimitriu M Poenaru E Bănacu M Furău GO Navolan D & Ples L. Defensive caesarean section: A reality and a recommended health care improvement for Romanian obstetrics Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 2019251 111 116 https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13025Search in Google Scholar

5Yang YT, Mello MM, Subramanian SV & Studdert DM. Relationship between malpractice litigation pressure and rates of caesarean section and vaginal birth after caesarean section. Medical care. 2009;47(2), 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e31818475de Yang YT Mello MM Subramanian SV & Studdert DM. Relationship between malpractice litigation pressure and rates of caesarean section and vaginal birth after caesarean section Medical care 2009472 234 242 https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e31818475deSearch in Google Scholar

6Cavallaro FL, Cresswell JA & Ronsmans C. Obstetricians’ Opinions of the Optimal Caesarean Rate: A Global Survey. PloS one. 2016;11(3), e0152779. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152779 Cavallaro FL Cresswell JA & Ronsmans C. Obstetricians’ Opinions of the Optimal Caesarean Rate: A Global Survey PloS one 2016113 e0152779 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152779Search in Google Scholar

7Antoniou E, Orovou E, Iliadou M, Sarella A, Palaska E, ­Sarantaki A, et al. Factors Associated with the Type of Caesarean Section in Greece and Their Correlation with International Guidelines. Acta informatica medica: AIM: journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina: casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH. 2021;29(1), 38–44. https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2021.29.38-44 Antoniou E Orovou E Iliadou M Sarella A Palaska E ­Sarantaki A et al Factors Associated with the Type of Caesarean Section in Greece and Their Correlation with International Guidelines Acta informatica medica: AIM: journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina: casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH 2021291 38 44 https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2021.29.38-44Search in Google Scholar

8World Health Organization. WHO Recommendations: Non-clinical Interventions to Reduce Unnecessary Caesarean Sections. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO World Health Organization WHO Recommendations: Non-clinical Interventions to Reduce Unnecessary Caesarean Sections Geneva World Health Organization 2018 Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGOSearch in Google Scholar

9Haines H, Rubertsson C, Pallant JF & Hildingsson I. Womens’ attitudes and beliefs of childbirth and association with birth preference: a comparison of a Swedish and an Australian sample in mid-pregnancy. Midwifery. 2012;28(6), e850–e856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2011.09.011 Haines H Rubertsson C Pallant JF & Hildingsson I. Womens’ attitudes and beliefs of childbirth and association with birth preference: a comparison of a Swedish and an Australian sample in mid-pregnancy Midwifery 2012286 e850 e856 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2011.09.011Search in Google Scholar

10Salomonsson B, Gullberg MT, Alehagen S & Wijma K. Self-efficacy beliefs and fear of childbirth in nulliparous women. Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynaecology. 2013;34(3), 116–121. https://doi.org/10.3109/0167482X.2013.824418 Salomonsson B Gullberg MT Alehagen S & Wijma K. Self-efficacy beliefs and fear of childbirth in nulliparous women Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynaecology 2013343 116 121 https://doi.org/10.3109/0167482X.2013.824418Search in Google Scholar

11Wiklund I, Edman G & Andolf E. Caesarean section on maternal request: reasons for the request, self-estimated health, expectations, experience of birth and signs of depression among first-time mothers. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2007;86(4), 451–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340701217913 Wiklund I Edman G & Andolf E. Caesarean section on maternal request: reasons for the request, self-estimated health, expectations, experience of birth and signs of depression among first-time mothers Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2007864 451 456 https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340701217913Search in Google Scholar

12Hall WA, Stoll K, Hutton EK & Brown H. A prospective study of effects of psychological factors and sleep on obstetric interventions, mode of birth, and neonatal outcomes among low-risk British Columbian women. BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2012;12, 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-12-78 Hall WA Stoll K Hutton EK & Brown H. A prospective study of effects of psychological factors and sleep on obstetric interventions, mode of birth, and neonatal outcomes among low-risk British Columbian women BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 201212 78 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-12-78Search in Google Scholar

13Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2020;2(4). https://doi:org/10.1002/hbe2.195 Ajzen I The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol 202024 https://doi:org/10.1002/hbe2.195Search in Google Scholar

14Varnakioti D, Gourounti K, Sarantaki A, Tzavara C, Lykeridou A. The development and the psychometric evaluation of the Adolescents Intentions towards the Birth Options Scale in Greek. European Journal of Midwifery. 2020;6 (March), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/145968 Varnakioti D Gourounti K Sarantaki A Tzavara C Lykeridou A The development and the psychometric evaluation of the Adolescents Intentions towards the Birth Options Scale in Greek European Journal of Midwifery 20206 March 1 9 https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/145968Search in Google Scholar

15McKay A, & Holowaty P. Sexual health education: a study of adolescents’ opinions, self-perceived needs, and current and preferred sources of information. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality. 1997;6(1), 29-38. McKay A & Holowaty P. Sexual health education: a study of adolescents’ opinions, self-perceived needs, and current and preferred sources of information The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 199761 29 38Search in Google Scholar

16McKay A. Sexual health education in the schools: Questions and answers. The Canadian journal of human sexuality. 2004;13(3):129-141 McKay A. Sexual health education in the schools: Questions and answers The Canadian journal of human sexuality 2004133129 141Search in Google Scholar

17Stoll K, Fairbrother N, Carty E, Jordan N, Miceli C, Vostrcil Y & Willihnganz L. “It’s all the rage these days”: University students’ attitudes toward vaginal and caesarean birth. Birth (Berkeley, Calif.). 2009;36(2), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.2009.00310.x Stoll K Fairbrother N Carty E Jordan N Miceli C Vostrcil Y & Willihnganz L. “It’s all the rage these days”: University students’ attitudes toward vaginal and caesarean birth Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) 2009362 133 140 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.2009.00310.xSearch in Google Scholar

18Klein MC, Kaczorowski J, Hearps S, Tomkinson J, Baradaran N, Hall WA, et al. (2011). Birth technology and maternal roles in birth: knowledge and attitudes of canadian women approaching childbirth for the first time. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada: Journal d’obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada: JOGC. 2009;33(6), 598–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34908-8 Klein MC Kaczorowski J Hearps S Tomkinson J Baradaran N Hall WA et al 2011 Birth technology and maternal roles in birth: knowledge and attitudes of canadian women approaching childbirth for the first time Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada: Journal d’obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada: JOGC 2009336 598 608 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34908-8Search in Google Scholar

19Handan O, Gulay R. University students’ attitudes toward natural birth. J. Gynecol. Womens Health. 2017;7(4). https://doi:10.19080/JGWH.2017.07.555717 Handan O Gulay R University students’ attitudes toward natural birth J. Gynecol. Womens Health 201774 https://doi:10.19080/JGWH.2017.07.555717Search in Google Scholar

20Antić LZ, Radoš SN, Jokić-Begić N. Are non-pregnant women afraid of childbirth? Prevalence and predictors of fear of childbirth in students. J. Psychosom. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2019;40(3):226231. https://doi:10.1080/0167482X.2018.1470162 Antić LZ Radoš SN Jokić-Begić N Are non-pregnant women afraid of childbirth? Prevalence and predictors of fear of childbirth in students J. Psychosom. Obstet. Gynaecol 2019403226231 https://doi:10.1080/0167482X.2018.1470162Search in Google Scholar

21Stoll KH, Downe S, Edmonds J, Gross MM, Malott A, McAra-Couper J et al. A Survey of University Students’ Preferences for Midwifery Care and Community Birth Options in 8 High-Income Countries. Journal of midwifery & women’s health. 2020;65(1), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.13069 Stoll KH Downe S Edmonds J Gross MM Malott A McAra-Couper J et al A Survey of University Students’ Preferences for Midwifery Care and Community Birth Options in 8 High-Income Countries Journal of midwifery & women’s health 2020651 131 141 https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.13069Search in Google Scholar

22Thomson G, Stoll K, Downe S & Hall WA. Negative impressions of childbirth in a North-West England student population. Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynaecology. 2017;38(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2016.1216960 Thomson G Stoll K Downe S & Hall WA. Negative impressions of childbirth in a North-West England student population Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynaecology 2017381 37 44 https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2016.1216960Search in Google Scholar

23Tilden EL, Caughey AB, Lee CS & Emeis C. The Effect of Childbirth Self-Efficacy on Perinatal Outcomes. Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing: JOGNN. 2016;45(4), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn.2016.06.003 Tilden EL Caughey AB Lee CS & Emeis C. The Effect of Childbirth Self-Efficacy on Perinatal Outcomes Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing: JOGNN 2016454 465 480 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn.2016.06.003Search in Google Scholar

24Kingdon C, Downe S, Betran AP. Non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section targeted at organisations, facilities and systems: Systematic review of qualitative studies. PLoS One. 2018;13(9): e0203274. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203274 https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A30023891/AONE?u=anon~86867a4b&sid=googleScholar&xid=aa0cda7c Kingdon C Downe S Betran AP Non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section targeted at organisations, facilities and systems: Systematic review of qualitative studies PLoS One 2018139 e0203274 https://doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203274 https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A30023891/AONE?u=anon~86867a4b&sid=googleScholar&xid=aa0cda7cSearch in Google Scholar