ArticleObstetrics and gynecology2011
Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery.
Article in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.
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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 155 citations in OpenAlex.
- Priming of labor with tafoxiparin in nulliparous term pregnant women with unripe cervix-Proof-of-concept and dose-finding results from a randomized controlled trial.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Trial
- Customized Probability of Vaginal Delivery With Induction of Labor and Expectant Management in Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Trial
- Should cervical favourability play a role in the decision for labour induction in gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia at term? An exploratory analysis of the HYPITAT trial.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2012Trial
- The Bishop Index and Birth Outcomes in Nulliparous Women Undergoing Labor Induction: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- BMI-Stratified Risk of Cesarean Delivery Following Labor Induction: A Robson Classification-Based Cohort Study with Predictive Modeling.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- An Appraisal of Labor Augmentation: An Update on Current Evidence and Practice.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026Review
- Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of misoprostol and a Cook cervical ripening double-balloon catheter, alone and in combination, for cervical ripening and induction of labor.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Development of Novel Predictive Scores for Obstetrical Risk Stratification in Adolescent Pregnancies: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Nulliparas at Term with Premature Rupture of Membranes and an Unfavorable Cervix: Labor Induction with Prostaglandin or Oxytocin? A Retrospective Matched Case Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Digital Examination vs. 4D Transperineal Ultrasound-Do They Compare in Labour Management? A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Membrane stripping in group B streptococcus carriers does not impede adequate intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis: a retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- The Correct Indication to Induce Labour in a Swiss Cantonal Hospital.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- A predictive model for successfully inducing active labor among pregnant women: Combining cervical status assessment and clinical characteristics.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023Article
- Reassessing the Bishop score in clinical practice for induction of labor leading to vaginal delivery and for evaluation of cervix ripening.Placenta and reproductive medicine · 2023Article
- Assessing uterine electrophysiology prior to elective term induction of labor.Current research in physiology · 2023Article
- Review
- In vivo Raman spectroscopy monitors cervical change during labor.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe Bishop score is the most commonly used method to assess the readiness of the cervix for induction. However, it was created without modern statistical methods. Our objective was to determine whether a simplified score can predict vaginal delivery equally well.
methodsData were analyzed for 5,610 nulliparous women with singleton, uncomplicated pregnancies between 37 0/7 and 41 6/7 weeks of gestation undergoing labor induction. These women had all five components of the Bishop score recorded. Logistic regression was performed and a simplified score created with significant components. Positive and negative predictive values and positive likelihood ratios were calculated.
resultsIn the regression model, only dilation, station, and effacement were significantly associated with vaginal delivery (P<.01). The simplified Bishop score was then devised using these three components (range 0-9) and compared with the original Bishop score (range 0-13) for prediction of successful induction, resulting in vaginal delivery. Compared with the original Bishop score (greater than 8), the simplified Bishop score (greater than 5) had a similar or better positive predictive value (87.7% compared with 87.0%), negative predictive value (31.3% compared with 29.8%), positive likelihood ratio (2.34 compared with 2.19), and correct classification rate (51.0% compared with 47.3%). Application of the simplified Bishop score in other populations, including indicated induction and spontaneous labor at term and preterm, were associated with similar vaginal delivery rates compared with the original Bishop score.
conclusionThe simplified Bishop score comprised of dilation, station, and effacement attains a similarly high predictive ability of successful induction as the original score. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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.