Trial reportSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2003
Misoprostol versus oxytocin for labor induction in term and post-term pregnancy: randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acupuncture for induction of labor in uncomplicated term pregnancies and the role of the acupoint selection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
- Induction of labour at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Oxytocin Versus Oral Misoprostol for Induction of Labor in Pregnant Women with Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: a Randomized Clinical Trial.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2023Trial
- Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Nulliparous Participants Undergoing Labor Induction by Cervical Ripening Method.American journal of perinatology · 2023Trial
- Safety and effectiveness of different modes of labor induction among pregnant women delivering at referral hospitals in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: a cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- The Correct Indication to Induce Labour in a Swiss Cantonal Hospital.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextMisoprostol, a synthetic E1 methyl analog prostaglandin, is at present receiving attention as a cervical modifier and labor induction agent. However, there is still a need for better determination of its safety and effectiveness.
objectiveTo compare intravaginal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in pregnant women with unripe cervices.
designRandomized controlled trial.
settingThe study was performed at the Leonor Mendes de Barros Maternity Hospital between November 1998 and December 2000.
participants210 pregnant women with intact membranes and indication for labor induction were selected. PROCEDURES: The women randomly received 25 g of vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours, not exceeding 8 doses (105 women), or oxytocin in a continuous infusion (105 women). MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The main parameters measured were: latent period, time from induction to vaginal delivery, delivery route, occurrence of vaginal delivery with time, occurrence of uterine tonus alterations, hypoxia and neonatal morbidity. To verify the statistical significance of the differences between the groups, the chi-squared, Student t and log-rank tests were used.
resultsThere were no significant differences between the groups concerning conditions for labor induction, age, parity, race, marital status, family income, initial Bishop Index and number of prenatal visits. The cesarean section rate, latent period and period from induction to vaginal delivery were significantly lower for the misoprostol group. With regard to uterine tonus alterations, tachysystole was significantly more common in the misoprostol group. However, there was no difference in hypoxia and neonatal morbidity between the groups.
conclusion25 g of misoprostol used vaginally every 4 hours is safer and more efficient for cervical ripening and labor induction than oxytocin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.