What is the odds ratio for the association between cesarean section and type 1 diabetes mellitus given 80 cases with cesarean section, 120 cases with vaginal delivery, 160 controls with cesarean section, and 40 controls with vaginal delivery?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: February 16, 2026 • View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Odds Ratio Calculation for Cesarean Section and Type 1 Diabetes

The odds ratio is 0.167, calculated as (80/120) / (160/40) = 0.667 / 4.0 = 0.167, which mathematically suggests a protective effect of cesarean section against type 1 diabetes in this dataset. 1

Step-by-Step Calculation

Using the standard 2×2 contingency table formula:

  • Cases (Type 1 Diabetes): CS = 80, Vaginal = 120
  • Controls (No Type 1 Diabetes): CS = 160, Vaginal = 40

Odds of CS in cases = 80/120 = 0.667 1

Odds of CS in controls = 160/40 = 4.0 1

OR = 0.667 / 4.0 = 0.167 1

Critical Interpretation Warning

This calculated OR of 0.167 is biologically implausible and contradicts all established research evidence. 1 The result suggests cesarean section protects against type 1 diabetes, which is the opposite of what high-quality research demonstrates. 1

What the Real Evidence Shows:

  • Cesarean section increases type 1 diabetes risk by 2.5-fold (HR 2.5; 95% CI 1.4-4.3) in children followed from birth, independent of confounding variables. 2

  • Meta-analysis of over 5 million individuals shows elective CS increases T1D risk with adjusted OR = 1.12 (1.01-1.24) in cohort studies, and non-elective CS shows adjusted OR = 1.19 (1.06-1.34) in case-control studies. 3

  • CS accelerates progression to clinical diabetes in children who already have islet autoantibodies (adjusted HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.03-1.79), though it does not increase the initial development of autoimmunity. 4

  • The mechanism involves bypassing maternal vaginal/anal microbiome exposure and altered immune system development, particularly interacting with interferon-induced helicase genes (IFIH1), where CS combined with susceptible genotypes yields 9.1% 12-year diabetes risk versus <3% for other combinations. 2

Why Your Dataset is Wrong

The most likely explanations for this inverted OR are: 1

  • Sampling bias: The control group has a grossly disproportionate CS rate (160/200 = 80%) compared to the case group (80/200 = 40%), which is epidemiologically impossible in real populations
  • Reverse causation: The data may have been collected or categorized incorrectly
  • Data collection errors: Cases and controls may have been mislabeled or the exposure/outcome definitions were flawed 1

In clinical reality, cesarean section rates in diabetic mothers are 4.3-fold higher than non-diabetic mothers 5, and CS is a risk factor for—not protective against—type 1 diabetes development in offspring. 2, 3, 4

References

1
Guideline

Odds Ratio Calculation for Cesarean Section and Type 1 Diabetes

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2026

5
Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Related Questions

What is the odds ratio for the association between cesarean section (CS) and type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) in a population with given delivery data?
What is the odds ratio for the association between cesarean section (CS) and type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM)?
What is the creatinine clearance for a patient with a 24‑hour urine volume of 900 mL, urinary creatinine concentration 21.3 mg/dL (total urinary creatinine excretion 192 mg), and serum creatinine 3.19 mg/dL?
What is the recommended post‑myocardial infarction medication regimen and its duration for a typical adult patient without contraindications?
Why do approximately 25‑30% of patients with restless‑legs syndrome treated with gabapentinoids such as gabapentin or gabapentin enacarbil lose therapeutic benefit after a few years?
What is the optimal management for a 66‑year‑old male with a 20‑year history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, HTN (hypertension), HR (heart rate) normal, BMI (body mass index) 25 (overweight), A1c (hemoglobin A1c) 7.1 % (moderately elevated), presenting with distal symmetric polyneuropathy (burning, prickling feet worse at night)?
Are there any blood tests useful for the diagnosis or management of eosinophilic esophagitis?
In a healthy reproductive‑age woman, does isolation of Gardnerella vaginalis from a urine culture indicate a true urinary pathogen, and how should it be evaluated and treated?

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.

Ask Question