Letter to the Editor
Canadian Medical Association Journal, vol. 191(33), 2019, pp. E923
Assistant Professor
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact
McMaster University
1280 Main St. West,
HSC3V - 43B
Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1
Canada
APA
Click to copy
Muraca, G. M., & Razaz, N. (2019). Key considerations when comparing outcomes by mode of delivery raise questions about study validity and clinical relevance. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 191(33), E923. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.72687
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Muraca, Giulia M, and Neda Razaz. “Key Considerations When Comparing Outcomes by Mode of Delivery Raise Questions about Study Validity and Clinical Relevance.” Canadian Medical Association Journal 191, no. 33 (2019): E923.
MLA
Click to copy
Muraca, Giulia M., and Neda Razaz. “Key Considerations When Comparing Outcomes by Mode of Delivery Raise Questions about Study Validity and Clinical Relevance.” Canadian Medical Association Journal, vol. 191, no. 33, 2019, p. E923, doi:10.1503/cmaj.72687.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{giulia2019a,
title = {Key considerations when comparing outcomes by mode of delivery raise questions about study validity and clinical relevance},
year = {2019},
issue = {33},
journal = {Canadian Medical Association Journal},
pages = {E923},
volume = {191},
doi = {10.1503/cmaj.72687},
author = {Muraca, Giulia M and Razaz, Neda}
}
In their CMAJ article, Korb and colleagues[1][1] investigated the important and complex issue of cesarean delivery and subsequent severe acute maternal morbidity (SAMM). Observational studies comparing maternal and perinatal outcomes following vaginal and cesarean delivery have been criticized for