Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19104376›Full record

SynthesisObstetrics and gynecology2009

Active compared with expectant delivery management in women with gestational diabetes: a systematic review.

Catherine Takacs Witkop, Donna Neale, Lisa M Wilson, Eric B Bass, Wanda K Nicholson

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07587632 (Natural Cervical Ripening to Prevent Pharmacological Induction of Labor - a Pilot Study.), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

NCT07587632 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Natural Cervical Ripening to Prevent Pharmacological Induction of Labor - a Pilot Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ZurichRan2026 to 2029Enrolled74ConditionsPregnancy, Induction of Labor, Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM)ArmsMembrane sweaping and Breast massage
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Diabetes mellitus: an independent predictor of duration of prostaglandin labor induction.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Management of shoulder dystocia.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022
    Article
  9. Timing of delivery in women with diabetes: A population-based study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Gestational diabetes from A to Z.World journal of diabetes · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Labor and neonatal outcomes after term induction of labor in gestational diabetes.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2015
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Catherine Takacs WitkopFrom the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Departments of General Preventive Medicine and Population, Family and Reproductive Health; the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Medicine; and the Johns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, Baltimore, Maryland.
Donna Neale
Lisa M Wilson
Eric B Bass
Wanda K Nicholson
The Centers · USGeneral Department of Preventive Medicine · VNJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe conducted a systematic review to estimate benefits and harms of the choice of timing of induction or elective cesarean delivery based on estimated fetal weight or gestational age in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). DATA SOURCES: An electronic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to January 2007. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two investigators independently reviewed titles and abstracts, assessed article quality, and abstracted data. Maternal outcomes included cesarean delivery and operative vaginal delivery. Neonatal outcomes included birth weight, macrosomia, large for gestational age, shoulder dystocia, birth trauma, neonatal intensive care admissions, and perinatal mortality. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND

resultsFive studies met our inclusion criteria: one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and four observational studies. The RCT (n=200) compared the effect of labor induction at term with expectant management. The proportion of newborns with birth weight greater than the 90th percentile was significantly greater in the expectant-management group (23% compared with 10% with active induction, P=.02); there were no significant differences in rates of cesarean delivery, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycemia, or perinatal deaths. The four observational studies suggest a potential reduction in macrosomia and shoulder dystocia with labor induction and cesarean delivery for estimated fetal weight indications, but there was insufficient evidence to assess other clinical outcomes.

conclusionActive rather than expectant management of labor at term for women with GDM may reduce rates of macrosomia and related complications. Further RCTs and observational studies with a broader range of outcomes are needed for sufficient evidence to inform clinical practice.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionDiabetes, GestationalLabor, InducedBirth WeightFemaleFetal WeightGestational AgeHumansInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornLabor PresentationPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID19104376
OpenAlexW2108853439

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.