Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24734084›Full record

ArticleIranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR2014

Vaginal versus sublingual misoprostol for labor induction at term and post term: a randomized prospective study.

Sedigheh Ayati, Fatemeh Vahidroodsari, Farnoosh Farshidi, Masoud Shahabian, Monavar Afzal Aghaee

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sedigheh AyatiWomen ᾽ s Health Research Center, Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Fatemeh VahidroodsariWomen ᾽ s Health Research Center, Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Farnoosh FarshidiObstetrics Gynecologist, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Masoud ShahabianMashhad University of Medical Sciences, Cardio-Vascular Research Center, Mashhad, Iran.
Monavar Afzal AghaeeDepartment of Medicosocial, Biostatics Unit, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences · IRGhaem Hospital · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We want to compare the efficacy and safety of vaginal versus sublingual misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor. This randomized clinical trial was performed on 140 women with medical or obstetric indications for labor induction. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: vaginal and sublingual administration of misoprostol. In first group, 25 µg misoprostol was placed in the posterior fornix of the vagina and second group received 25 µg misoprostol sublingually, every 6 hours for 24 h. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were analyzed. There was no significant difference in the demographic characteristics between two groups. The main indication for cesarean section in both groups was fetal distress, followed by absence of active labor progress. Evaluation of cesarean indication was not significantly different in two groups; including fetal distress, absence of active labor, uterine over activity and failure to progress. The maternal complication in sublingual group included residual placenta (2%), tachysystole (2%), vomiting (12%), atoni (3.3%) and abdominal pain (5.5%), although there was no significant difference between two groups. Sublingual misoprostol is as effective as vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term. However, sublingual misoprostol has the advantage of easy administration and may be more suitable than vaginal misoprostol.

Indexed as

Induction of laborMisoprostolSublingualVaginal

Identifiers

PMID24734084
PMCPMC3985259
OpenAlexW1918684485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.