Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23076915›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Trial of instrumental delivery in theatre versus immediate caesarean section for anticipated difficult assisted births.

Franz Majoko, Glenn Gardener

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Instruments for assisted vaginal birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Subdural haematoma in neonates following forceps-assisted delivery: case series and review of the literature.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Maternal morbidity following a trial of labor after cesarean birth: A scoping review of operative vaginal birth compared with cesarean birth in the second stage of labor.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Franz MajokoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, UK. majokof215@doctors.org.uk.
Glenn Gardener
Mater Mothers' Hospital · AUSingleton Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe majority of women have spontaneous vaginal births, but some women need assistance in the second stage with delivery of the baby, using either the obstetric forceps or vacuum extraction. Rates of instrumental vaginal delivery range from 5% to 20% of all births in industrialised countries. The majority of instrumental vaginal deliveries are conducted in the delivery room, but in a small proportion (2% to 5%), a trial of instrumental vaginal delivery is conducted in theatre with preparations made for proceeding to caesarean section.

objectivesTo determine differences in maternal and neonatal morbidity between women who, due to anticipated difficulty, have trial of instrumental vaginal delivery in theatre and those who have immediate caesarean section for failure to progress in the second stage. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 June 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing trial of instrumental vaginal delivery (vacuum extraction or forceps) in operating theatre to immediate caesarean section for women with failure to progress in the second stage (active second stage more than 60 minutes in primigravidae). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified no studies meeting our inclusion criteria. MAIN

resultsNo studies were included. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is no current evidence from randomised trials to influence practice.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionExtraction, ObstetricalFemaleHumansLabor Stage, SecondObstetrical ForcepsOperating RoomsPregnancyPregnancy, High-RiskTrial of Labor

Identifiers

PMID23076915
PMCPMC4171385
OpenAlexW1891108095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.