References
  1. The Economist. Childbirth Caesar’s legions - The global rise of Caesarean sections is being driven not by medical necessity but by growing wealth—and perverse financial incentives for doctors.The Economist , from the print edition, August 15th 2015, New York and São Paulo (http://www.economist.com/node/21660974/print).
  2. Domingues RMSM, Dias MAB, Nakamura-Pereira M, Torres JA, d’Orsi E, Pereira APE, Schilithz AOC, Leal MC. Process of decision-making regarding the mode of birth in Brazil: from the initial preference of women to the final mode of birth. Cad. Saúde Pública 2014; 30 Sup: S101-S116.
  3. Klein G. Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press 1999.
  4. Gigerenzer G. Risk savvy: how to make good decisions. New York, NY: Viking / Penguin 2014.
  5. MacDonald C., Pinion SB, MacLeod UM. Scottish female obstetricians’ views on elective caesarean section and personal choice for delivery.J Obstet Gynaecol 2002; 22: 586-9.
  6. Bergholt T, Østberg B, Legarth J, Weber T. Danish obstetricians’ personal preference and general attitude to elective cesarean section on maternal request: a nation-wide postal survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004; 83: 262-266.
  7. Ouyang YQ, Zhang Q. A study on personal mode of delivery among Chinese obstetrician-gynecologists, midwives and nurses. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013; 287: 37-41.
  8. Farrell SA, Baskett TF, Farrell KD. The choice of elective cesarean delivery in obstetrics: a voluntary survey of Canadian health care professionals. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2005; 16: 378-83.
  9. Turner CE, Young JM, Solomon MJ, Ludlow J, Benness C, Phippse H. Vaginal delivery compared with elective caesarean section: the views of pregnant women and clinicians. BJOG 2008; 115: 1494-502.
  10. Arikan, DC, Arikan DC, O¨zer A, Arikan I, Coskun A, Kiran H. Turkish obstetricians’ personal preference for mode of delivery and attitude toward cesarean delivery on maternal request. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011; 284: 543-549.
  11. Lightly K, Shaw E, Dailami N, Bisson D. Personal birth preferences and actual mode of delivery outcomes of obstetricians and gynaecologists in South West England; with comparison to regional and national birth statistics. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014; 181: 95-98.
  12. Kovavisarach E, Ruttanapan K. Self-Preferred Route of Delivery of Thai Obstetricians and Gynecologists. J Med Assoc Thai 2016; 99 Suppl 2: S84-90.
  13. Aref-Adib M, Vlachodimitropoulou E, Khasriya R, Lamb BW, Selo-Ojeme D. UK O&G trainees’ attitudes to caesarean delivery for maternal request. J Obstet Gynaecol 2018; 38: 367-371.
  14. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS ONE 2016; 11: e0148343. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148343.
  15. Scheffer, M, Biancarelli A, Cassenote A. Demografia Médica no Brasil 2015. Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina da USP. Conselho Regional de Medicina do Estado de São Paulo. Conselho Federal de Medicina. São Paulo: 2015.
  16. Ferrari J, Lima NM. Atitudes dos profissionais de obstetrícia em relação à escolha da via de parto em Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brasil.Rev Bioét 2010; 18: 645-658.
  17. Rivo JC, Amyx M, Pingray V, Casale RA, Fiorillo AE, Krupitzki HB, Malamud JD, Mendilaharzu M, Medina ML, del Pino AB, Ribola L, Schvartzman JA, Tartalo GM, Trasmonte M, Varela S, Althabe F, Belizan JM. Obstetrical providers’ preferred mode of delivery and attitude towards non-medically indicated caesarean sections: a cross-sectional study. BJOG 2018; 125: 1294–1302.
  18. Gabbe SG, Holzman GB. Obstetricians’ choice of delivery. Lancet2001; 357: 722.
  19. Hantoushzadeh S, Rajabzadeh A, Saadati A, Mahdanian A, AshraWnia N, Khazardoost S, Borna S, Maleki M, Shariat M. Cesarean or normal vaginal delivery: overview of physicians’ self-preference and suggestion to patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2009; 280: 33-37.
  20. Gonen R, Tamir A, Degani S. Obstetricians’ opinions regarding patient choice in cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 99: 577-80.
  21. Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk NM. Survey of obstetricians’ personal preference and discretionary practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997; 73: 1-4.
  22. van der Does J, van Roosmalen J. Obstetricians’ choice of delivery.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 99: 139.
  23. Backe B, Salvesen KA, Sviggum O. Norwegian obstetricians prefer vaginal route of delivery. Lancet 2002; 359: 629.
  24. Jacquemyn Y, Ahankour F, Martens G. Flemish obstetricians’ personal preference regarding mode of delivery and attitude towards caesarean section on demand. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 111: 164-6.
  25. Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, and Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean-the Maine experience. Birth 2005; 32: 203-6.
  26. Mc Gurgan P, Coulter-Smith S, O‘Donovan PJ. A national confidential survey of obstetrician’s personal preferences regarding mode of delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001 ; 97: 17-19.
  27. Lataifeh I, Zayed F, Al-Kuran O, Al-Mehaisen L, Khriesat W, Khader Y. Jordanian obstetricians’ personal preference regarding mode of delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88: 733-6.
  28. Pinker S. The blank slate – the modern denial of human nature. London: Peguin Books 2002.
  29. Pinker S. How the mind works. London: Peguin Books 1997.
  30. Ness RM, Williams GC. How we get sick – the new science of Darwinian medicine. New York: Vintage Books 1996.
  31. Nesse RM. Good reasons for bad feelings - Insights from the frontiers of evolutionary psychology. New York: Dutton / Penguin 2019.
  32. Finsen V, Storeheier AH, Aasland OG. Cesarean section - Norwegian women do as obstetricians do, not as obstetricians say. Birth2008; 35: 117-120.
Table 1) Demographic characteristics of the obstetricians who participated in the survey, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil