Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12388957›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2002

Reassessing the labor curve in nulliparous women.

Jun Zhang, James F Troendle, Michael K Yancey

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 77 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02326077 suspendednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Intrapartum Ultrasonography - Sonopartogram. Longitudinal Evaluation of the Mechanism of Active Labor Using Ultrasound Parameters

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Medicine and Pharmacy CraiovaRan2020 to 2023Enrolled4,000ConditionsNormal Labor, Obstetric Labor ComplicationsArmsUltrasound, Acceptability of ultrasound monitoring of labor, Patients' experience regarding intrapartum ultrasound
NCT06987591 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Low-Dose Epidural Analgesia on Labour Progression in Robson Class 1 Women: a Retrospective Study

TypeobservationalSponsorFondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCSRan2023 to 2025Enrolled5,995ConditionsEpidural Analgesia, Obstetric
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

77 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Duration of spontaneous labour in 'low-risk' women with 'normal' perinatal outcomes: A systematic review.European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Foley catheter for induction of labor: potential barriers to adopting the technique.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2015
    Trial
  10. Impact of active phase duration on neonatal and maternal adverse outcomes: A systematic analysis of parity stratification, body mass index interaction, and predictive modeling in a retrospective cohort.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  11. An Appraisal of Labor Augmentation: An Update on Current Evidence and Practice.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026
    Review
  12. Body mass index and failed induction of labor: A cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jun ZhangDivision of Epidemiology, Statistics, and Prevention Research, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development/NIH, Building 6100, Room 7B03, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. jim_zhang@nih.gov
James F Troendle
Michael K Yancey

Funding

NULLIPARA LABOR AND CESAREAN DELIVERY WITH EPIDURAL ANALGESIAZ01HD002534 · NICHD · CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT · PI ZHANG, JIM · 1998 to 2002
–
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOur purpose was to examine the pattern of labor progression in nulliparous parturients in contemporary obstetric practice. STUDY

designWe extracted detailed labor data from 1329 nulliparous parturients with a term, singleton, vertex fetus of normal birth weight after spontaneous onset of labor. Cesarean deliveries were excluded. We used a repeated-measures regression with a 10th-order polynomial function to discover the average labor curve under contemporary practice. With use of an interval-censored regression with a log normal distribution, we also computed the expected time interval of the cervix to reach the next centimeter, the expected rate of cervical dilation at each phase of labor, and the duration of labor for fetal descent at various stations.

resultsOur average labor curve differs markedly from the Friedman curve. The cervix dilated substantially slower in the active phase. It took approximately 5.5 hours from 4 cm to 10 cm, compared with 2.5 hours under the Friedman curve. We observed no deceleration phase. Before 7 cm, no perceivable change in cervical dilation for more than 2 hour was not uncommon. The 5th percentiles of rate of cervical dilation were all below 1 cm per hour. The 95th percentile of time interval for fetal descent from station +1/3 to +2/3 was 3 hours at the second stage.

conclusionOur results suggest that the pattern of labor progression in contemporary practice differs significantly from the Friedman curve. The diagnostic criteria for protraction and arrest disorders of labor may be too stringent in nulliparous women.

Indexed as

ParityAdultFemaleHumansLabor, ObstetricLabor Stage, FirstLabor Stage, SecondPregnancyTime Factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.