ArticleIranian Red Crescent medical journal2014
The diagnostic accuracy of purple line in prediction of labor progress in omolbanin hospital, iran.
Article in Iranian Red Crescent medical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of non-invasive methods for assessing the progress of labor in the first stage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Pooled it
- Routine vaginal examinations compared to other methods for assessing progress of labour to improve outcomes for women and babies at term.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Mapping Intrusive and Non-Intrusive Ultrasound Technologies and Devices Used in Vaginal Examinations During Intrapartum: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Alternative approach to monitoring labor: purple line.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Observational
- Inconsistent definitions of prolonged labor in international literature: a scoping review.AJOG global reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, vaginal examination is the gold standard for assessment of labor progress. The World Health Organization emphasizes that the number of vaginal examinations should be limited where it is necessary.
objectivesTherefore, this study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of purple line in the prediction of labor progress. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 350 women with a single pregnancy in vertex presentation and gestational age of 38-42 weeks without any medical disorder, admitted to government hospitals of Mashhad, were selected using convenience sampling. Vaginal examination and observation of the line each hour in the active phase of labor were measured. Abnormal progress of labor was defined as cervical dilatation less than 1 centimeter/hour in the active phase for two consecutive hours and fetal head descend less than 1cm/h or duration of more than two hours for nulliparous and one hour for multiparous In the second stage of labor. Data was analyzed by SPSS version 16 using chi -square test.
resultsThe purple line appeared in 75.3% of women during the active phase of labor. Appearance of the purple line in the prediction of labor progress had 90.2% sensitivity, 45.3% specificity, 88.1% positive predictive value, 51.0% negative predictive value in the first stage of labor and had 87.6% sensitivity, 52.4% specificity, 96.5% positive predictive value, 22.0% negative predictive value in the second stage of labor and has 68.57% sensitivity, 42.66% specificity, 85.32% positive predictive value, and 43.85% negative predictive value for the total labor.
conclusionsAccording to the appearance of the purple line in most of the cases and its high sensitivity and specificity, we can use it as a non-invasive complementary method for clinical assessment of labor progress.
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.