Talk:Obstructed labour

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 March 2020 and 12 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Smaulsmall. Peer reviewers: Grang001.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2018 and 5 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Grierson.k.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

References?

Cesarean section is commonly associated with dystocia due to wrongly estimating the length of labor.

79.176.117.178 (talk) 10:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC) The section about Epidemiology must be ameliorated w.r.t. two points; 1. Number of deaths per year; must state name of country or "worldwide" 2. Must state death of who; Infant or Mother.79.176.117.178 (talk) 10:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

I would dearly love to see some references and statistics in this article. There is a definite bias throughout. In particular, I would like to see the sentence "Approximately a fifth of human labors have dystocia" substantiated. Asturnut (talk) 06:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I ditto Asturnut. Where does the statistic "Approximately a fifth of human labors have dystocia" come from? That's an important number and I really could have used it. [User:Wikigoddess|wikigoddess]] (talk) 20:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Transclusion to Childbirth

The content of this page had been copied to Childbirth and had got a little out of sync. I've therefore transcluded the appropriate portion of this page to avoid this happening again. Lineslarge (talk) 21:46, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Emily Heacock Peer Review

1. What does the article (or section) do well?

- Overall, I like how this article very clearly explains the process of labour dystocia in terms that are not too difficult to understand. Even when medical vocabulary is brought into play, it’s still clear what those words mean because they are often linked to another source, article, or definition. I also like the use of visuals because it adds more of a realistic touch to the article as a whole.

2. What changes would you suggest overall?

- I think it might be a good idea to include examples of what should happen during a normal labour so it will be more clear how obstructed labour differs from that.

3. What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution?

- Adding to some of the sections later on in the article such as “Etymology” or “Prognosis” could really strengthen the article and allow the reader to more fully understand the process of obstructed labour.

4. Did you learn anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own?

- From this article I learned that there are many more factors that go into an obstructed labor than I initially thought. I also learned that it’s not just humans that are affected by it because I had never thought of it in the context of other organisms.

Heacock.e (talk) 23:54, 29 October 2018 (UTC)