Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25193157›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2014

Induction of labour in pre-eclamptic women: a randomised trial comparing the Foley balloon catheter with oral misoprostol.

Hillary Bracken, Shuchita Mundle, Brian Faragher, Thomas Easterling, Alan Haycox, Mark Turner, Zarko Alfirevic, Beverly Winikoff, Andrew Weeks

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01801410 (Induction of Labour in Pre-eclamptic Women), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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.

NCT01801410 phase3completednot on this map

Induction of Labour in Pre-eclamptic Women: a Randomised Trial Comparing the Foley Balloon Catheter With Oral Misoprostol

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of LiverpoolRan2013 to 2015Enrolled602ConditionsPre-eclampsia, Fetus or Newborn, Effects of Induction of LaborArmsFoley Catheter, Misoprostol
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Methods of induction of labour: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Article
  6. Mechanical methods for induction of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Mechanical methods for induction of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Hillary BrackenGynuity Health Projects, 15 East 26th Street, Suite 801, New York, NY 10010, USA. hbracken@gynuity.org.
Shuchita Mundle
Brian Faragher
Thomas Easterling
Alan Haycox
Mark Turner
Zarko Alfirevic
Beverly Winikoff
Andrew Weeks
University of Liverpool · GBGynuity Health Projects · USGovernment Medical College · INLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBLiverpool Women's Hospital · GBUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Medical Research Council G1100686Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBetween 40,000 and 80,000 pregnant women die annually from pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Although magnesium sulphate and anti-hypertensive therapies can reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with pre-eclampsia, the only cure comes with delivery. Prompt delivery of the baby, preferably by vaginal route, is vital in order to achieve good maternal and neonatal outcomes. Induction of labour is therefore a critical intervention in order to prevent morbidity to both mother and baby. Two low cost interventions - oral misoprostol tablets and transcervical Foley catheterization - are already used by some in low resource settings, but their relative risks and benefits are not known. The trial will compare the risks, benefits, and trade-offs in efficacy, safety, acceptability and cost of misoprostol and Foley catheter for induction in women with preeclampsia or uncontrolled hypertension. METHODS/

designA total of 602 women with an ongoing pregnancy with a live fetus requiring delivery because of pre-eclampsia or uncontrolled hypertension will be randomly assigned to labor induction with a transcervical Foley catheter or oral misoprostol 25 micrograms. Women will be recruited at two hospitals in Nagpur, India. The misoprostol group will receive oral misoprostol 25 microgram every 2 hours for a maximum of 12 doses or until active labor commences. The Foley group will undergo induction using a Foley catheter (silicone, size 18 F with 30 ml balloon) which will remain until active labor starts, the Foley catheter falls out, or 12 hours have elapsed. The primary outcome will be the attainment of vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Providers administering the treatment and those assessing the outcomes will not be blinded to group assignment.

trial registrationNCT01801410 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Indexed as

Pregnancy OutcomeAdministration, IntravaginalAdolescentAdultCatheterizationCervical RipeningConfidence IntervalsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGestational AgeHumansLabor, InducedLogistic ModelsMisoprostolOxytocicsPatient SafetyMisoprostolOxytocics

Identifiers

PMID25193157
PMCPMC4261642
OpenAlexW2042933344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.