SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 16 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
102 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 418 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
- Effects of date fruit (Phoenix dactylifera L.) on labor and delivery outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Pooled it
- Risks of stillbirth and neonatal death with advancing gestation at term: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of 15 million pregnancies.PLoS medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Effects of induction of labor prior to post-term in low-risk pregnancies: a systematic review.JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports · 2019Pooled it
- Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Planned birth at or near term for improving health outcomes for pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes and their infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Planned birth at or near term for improving health outcomes for pregnant women with gestational diabetes and their infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Pharmacological and mechanical interventions for labour induction in outpatient settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Planned early delivery versus expectant management of the term suspected compromised baby for improving outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Caesarean Delivery Rate Review: An Evidence-Based Analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2015Pooled it
- Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Use of labour induction and risk of cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2014Pooled it
- Elective birth at 37 weeks' gestation for women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Timing of birth to improve outcomes in chronic or gestational hypertension: the WILL RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Trial
- Labor induction at 41Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Trial
- Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Trial
- Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Trial
42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs a pregnancy continues beyond term the risks of babies dying inside the womb or in the immediate newborn period increase. Whether a policy of labour induction at a predetermined gestational age can reduce this increased risk is the subject of this review.
objectivesTo evaluate the benefits and harms of a policy of labour induction at term or post-term compared with awaiting spontaneous labour or later induction of labour. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials conducted in women at or beyond term. The eligible trials were those comparing a policy of labour induction with a policy of awaiting spontaneous onset of labour. Cluster-randomised trials and cross-over trials are not included. Quasi-random allocation schemes such as alternation, case record numbers or open random-number lists were not eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. Outcomes are analysed in two main categories: gestational age and cervix status. MAIN
resultsWe included 22 trials reporting on 9383 women. The trials were generally at moderate risk of bias.Compared with a policy of expectant management, a policy of labour induction was associated with fewer (all-cause) perinatal deaths: risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.88; 17 trials, 7407 women. There was one perinatal death in the labour induction policy group compared with 13 perinatal deaths in the expectant management group. The number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) with induction of labour in order to prevent one perinatal death was 410 (95% CI 322 to 1492).For the primary outcome of perinatal death and most other outcomes, no differences between timing of induction subgroups were seen; the majority of trials adopted a policy of induction at 41 completed weeks (287 days) or more.Fewer babies in the labour induction group had meconium aspiration syndrome (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73; eight trials, 2371 infants) compared with a policy of expectant management. There was no statistically significant difference between the rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission for induction compared with expectant management (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.04; 10 trials, 6161 infants). For women in the policy of induction arms of trials, there were significantly fewer caesarean sections compared with expectant management in 21 trials of 8749 women (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.97). AUTHORS'
conclusionsA policy of labour induction compared with expectant management is associated with fewer perinatal deaths and fewer caesarean sections. Some infant morbidities such as meconium aspiration syndrome were also reduced with a policy of post-term labour induction although no significant differences in the rate of NICU admission were seen.However, the absolute risk of perinatal death is small. Women should be appropriately counselled in order to make an informed choice between scheduled induction for a post-term pregnancy or monitoring without induction (or delayed induction).
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.