Back

National Validation of a Dual-Outcome Risk Score for Trial of Labor After Cesarean: A Population-Based Analysis of 477,693 Deliveries

Crabtree, L.; Gheorghe, C. P.

2026-04-08 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.04.07.26350334 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objective: To externally validate, at the national level, a cumulative risk score for vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) success and neonatal morbidity derived from single center data. Methods: We conducted a population based cohort study of all trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) attempts among term, singleton deliveries recorded in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention natality files, 2020 to 2024 (N=477,693). The cumulative risk score (range - 1 to 7 points) incorporated body mass index (BMI) 30 or greater (+1), BMI 40 or greater (+1), induction of labor (IOL; +1), diabetes mellitus (+1), hypertensive disorder (+1), maternal age 40 years or older (+1), gestational age 41 weeks or greater (+1), and prior vaginal delivery (-1). VBAC success rates and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission rates were evaluated across risk strata. Results: The overall VBAC rate was 73.3% (350,340/477,693). The cumulative risk score demonstrated a monotonic relationship with VBAC success: score -1, 90.5%; score 0, 76.4%; score 1, 69.4%; score 2, 62.2%; score 3, 55%; and score 4 or higher, 44.8%. NICU admission rates increased concordantly from 43.8 to 111.1 per 1,000 across strata. Prior vaginal delivery was the strongest individual predictor (VBAC 86.4% vs 62.5%). VBAC rates and TOLAC volume were stable across 2020 to 2024. Conclusion: The cumulative risk score derived from single center data was externally validated in a national cohort of 477,693 TOLAC attempts. The monotonic dose-response relationship between risk score and both VBAC success and NICU admission was confirmed, supporting the use of this score for individualized TOLAC counseling.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 7%
22.6%
2
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.7%
3
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.2%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 12%
7.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.9%
6
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
7
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
8
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.7%
9
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.4%
10
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
11
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
12
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
13
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.3%
14
Journal of Clinical Pathology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
15
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
16
Human Reproduction
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
17
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
18
Journal of Medical Economics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
19
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
20
Pain
70 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
21
JAMA
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
22
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
23
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
24
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
25
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
26
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%