1. Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Me Rev 2001; 12 (1): 23–39. doi: 10.1017/S0965539501000122.
2. World Health Organisation. The Robson classification implementation manual. 2017 [online]. Available from: https: //www.who.int/news/item/30-11-2017-the-robson-classification-implementation-manual.
3. Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 15 (1): 179–194. doi: 10.1053/ beog.2000.0156.
4. World Health Organisation. Statement of caesarean section rates. Reprod Health Matters 149–150. 2015 [online]. Available from: https: //www.who.int/publications/i/item/ WHO- RHR-15.02.
5. Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health 2015; 12: 57. doi: 10.1186/s12978-015-0043-6.
6. Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ et al. WHO statement on caesarena section rates. BJOG 2016; 123 (5): 667–670. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528. 13526.
7. World Health Organisation. WHO recommendations on maternal and newborn care for a positive postnatal experience. 2022 [online]. Available from: https: //www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240045989.
8. Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic. Forecast of the development of the Slovak population until 2025. 2025 [online]. Available from: http: //portal.statistics.sk/showdoc.do?docid=10331.
9. Kjerulff KH, Paul IM, Weisman CS et al. Association between mode of first delivery and subsequent fecundity and fertility. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3 (4): e203076. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3076.
10. Kjerulff KH, Zhu J, Weisman CS et al. First birth caesarean section and subsequent fertility: a population-based study in the USA, 2000–2008. Hum Reprod 2013; 28 (12): 3349–3357. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det343.
11. Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L et al. Short- -term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet 2018; 392 (10155): 1349–1357. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736 (18) 31930-5.
12. Gao Y, Xue Q, Chen G et al. An analysis of the indications for cesarean section in a teaching hospital in China. In Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013; 170 (2): 414–418. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.08.009.
13. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB et al. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990–2014. PLoS One 2017; 11 (2): e0148343. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148343.
14. Antoine C, Young BK. Cesarean section one hundred years 1920-–2020: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. J Perinat Med 2020; 49 (1): 5–16. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2020-0305.
15. Zeitlin J, Durox M, Macfarlane A et al. Classification system for comparing caesarean section rates in Europe: an analysis of routine data from the Euro-Peristat study. BJOG 2021; 128 (9): 1444–1453. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16634.
16. NCZI. 1996–2021. Data of the National Medical Center Information of the Slovak Republic. 2021 [online]. Available from: https: //www.nczisk.sk/Aktuality/Pages/Starostlivost-o-rodicku-a-novorodenca-v-Slovenskej-republike-2021.aspx.
17. Martincek V, Bielik T, Rak A et al. Možnosti zníženia počtu cisárskych rezov zavedením Robsonovej klasifikácie. Slov Gynek Pôrod 2021; 28 (4): 176–180.
18. Zahumensky J, Psenkova P, Nemethova B et al. Evaluation of cesarean delivery rates at three university hospital labor units using the Robson classification system. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2019; 146 (1): 118–125. doi: 10.1002/ ijgo.12842.
19. Zahumensky J, Psenkova P, Dolezal P et al. Impact of implementing a multifaceted intervention to reduce rates of cesarean section: a quality-improvement study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2020; 151 (2): 244–248. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13345.
20. Záhumenský J, Pšenková P, Sládkovičová J et al. Predčasný odtok plodovej vody v termíne a jeho postavenie v Robsonovej klasifikácií rodičiek. Actual Gyn 2019; 11: 45– 50.
Submitted/ Doručené: 30. 10. 2024
Accepted/ Prijaté: 19. 11. 2024
Tomáš Debnár, MD
Gyncare s.r.o.
Novozámocká 67
949 05 Nitra
Slovak Republic
