IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2022i1p668-d1020151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Advanced Maternal Age Comprise an Independent Risk Factor for Caesarean Section? A Population-Wide Study

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Šťastná

    (Department of Demography and Geodemography, Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 00 Praha, Czech Republic)

  • Tomáš Fait

    (Department of Demography and Geodemography, Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 00 Praha, Czech Republic
    Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, 150 06 Praha, Czech Republic
    Department of Health Care Studies, College of Polytechnics Jihlava, 586 01 Jihlava, Czech Republic)

  • Jiřina Kocourková

    (Department of Demography and Geodemography, Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 00 Praha, Czech Republic)

  • Eva Waldaufová

    (Department of Demography and Geodemography, Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 00 Praha, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the association between a mother’s age and the risk of caesarean section (CS) when controlling for health factors and selected sociodemographic characteristics. Methods: Binary logistic regression models for all women who gave birth in Czechia in 2018 (N = 111,749 mothers who gave birth to 113,234 children). Results: An increase in the age of a mother significantly increases the odds of a CS birth according to all of the models; depending on the model, OR: 1.62 (95% CI 1.54–1.71) to 1.84 (95% CI 1.70–1.99) for age group 35–39 and OR: 2.83 (95% CI 2.60–3.08) to 3.71 (95% CI 3.23–4.27) for age group 40+ compared to age group 25–29. This strong association between the age of a mother and the risk of CS is further reinforced for primiparas (probability of a CS: 11% for age category ≤ 19, 23% for age category 35–39, and 38% for age category 40+). However, the increasing educational attainment of young women appears to have weakened the influence of increasing maternal age on the overall share of CS births; depending on the model, OR: 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.91) to 0.87 (95% CI 0.83–0.91) for tertiary-educated compared to secondary-educated women. Conclusions: The age of a mother comprises an independent risk factor for a CS birth when the influence of health, socioeconomic, and demographic characteristics is considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Šťastná & Tomáš Fait & Jiřina Kocourková & Eva Waldaufová, 2022. "Does Advanced Maternal Age Comprise an Independent Risk Factor for Caesarean Section? A Population-Wide Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-11, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2022:i:1:p:668-:d:1020151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/668/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/668/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tomáš Sobotka & Anna Šťastná & Kryštof Zeman & Dana Hamplová & Vladimíra Kantorová, 2008. "Czech Republic: A rapid transformation of fertility and family behaviour after the collapse of state socialism," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(14), pages 403-454.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tomas Frejka, 2008. "Overview Chapter 5: Determinants of family formation and childbearing during the societal transition in Central and Eastern Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(7), pages 139-170.
    2. Brienna Perelli-Harris, 2008. "Ukraine: On the border between old and new in uncertain times," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(29), pages 1145-1178.
    3. Alessandra Trimarchi & Jan Van Bavel, 2017. "Pathways to marital and non-marital first birth: the role of his and her education," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 15(1), pages 143-179.
    4. Tomáš Sobotka, 2008. "Overview Chapter 6: The diverse faces of the Second Demographic Transition in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(8), pages 171-224.
    5. Mathias Lerch, 2013. "Fertility Decline During Albania’s Societal Crisis and its Subsequent Consolidation," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(2), pages 195-220, May.
    6. Anna Matysiak, 2011. "Fertility Developments In Central And Eastern Europe: The Role Of Work–Family Tensions," Demográfia English Edition, Hungarian Demographic Research Institute, vol. 54(5), pages 7-30.
    7. Monika Mynarska & Anna Matysiak, 2010. "Diffusion of cohabitation in Poland," Working Papers 19, Institute of Statistics and Demography, Warsaw School of Economics.
    8. Kuba, Radim & Flegr, Jaroslav & Havlíček, Jan, 2018. "The effect of birth order on the probability of university enrolment," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 61-72.
    9. Alzbeta Mullerova, 2016. "Mind the employment gap: an impact evaluation of the Czech multi-speed parental benefit reform," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-30, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    10. Zuzanna Brzozowska, 2014. "Fertility and education in Poland during state socialism," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(12), pages 319-336.
    11. Janetta Nestorová Dická & Filip Lipták, 2024. "Regional fertility predictors based on socioeconomic determinants in Slovakia," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 1-43, September.
    12. Martina Štípková, 2013. "Declining health disadvantage of non-marital children," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 29(25), pages 663-706.
    13. Markéta Pechholdová & Gabriela Šamanová, 2013. "Mortality by marital status in a rapidly changing society: Evidence from the Czech Republic," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 29(12), pages 307-322.
    14. Busygin V.P. & Kulakov D.A., 2016. "Comparative efficiency of child benefits in different European countries," World of economics and management / Vestnik NSU. Series: Social and Economics Sciences, Socionet, vol. 16(3), pages 42-56.
    15. Joshua R. Goldstein & Tomáš Sobotka & Aiva Jasilioniene, 2009. "The end of 'lowest-low' fertility? (with supplementary materials)," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2009-029, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    16. Alzbeta Mullerova, 2017. "Family policy and maternal employment in the Czech transition: a natural experiment," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 1185-1210, October.
    17. Anna Šťastná & Jiřina Kocourková & Branislav Šprocha, 2020. "Parental Leave Policies and Second Births: A Comparison of Czechia and Slovakia," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 39(3), pages 415-437, June.
    18. Anna Matysiak, 2009. "Is Poland really 'immune' to the spread of cohabitation?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 21(8), pages 215-234.
    19. David Clifford & Jane Falkingham & Andrew Hinde, 2010. "Through Civil War, Food Crisis and Drought: Trends in Fertility and Nuptiality in Post-Soviet Tajikistan [Au Travers de la Guerre Civile, de la Crise Alimentaire et de la Sécheresse : les Évolution," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 26(3), pages 325-350, August.
    20. Gina Potârcă & Melinda Mills & Laurent Lesnard, 2013. "Family Formation Trajectories in Romania, the Russian Federation and France: Towards the Second Demographic Transition? [Trajectoires de formation de la famille en Roumanie, en Fédération de Russie," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 69-101, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2022:i:1:p:668-:d:1020151. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.