ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2017
Oral Misoprostol Solution for Induction of Labour.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Maternal BMI on the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Misoprostol for Labor Induction.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Induction of Labour in a District Hospital of Rural Nepal: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.JNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association · 2024Article
- Robson's Ten Group Classification System to Evaluate Cesarean Section Rates in Honduras: The Relevance of Labor Induction.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the effects of oral misoprostol solution for induction of labour. STUDY
designThis is a prospective observational study.
settingThis study was conducted in Government Medical College, Aurangabad.
methodPatients undergoing induction of labour after 36 weeks of pregnancy were allocated by randomization to induction of labour with oral misoprostol solution administered 2 h apart. Delivery within 24 h after induction with oral misoprostol solution was the primary outcome on which the sample size was based. The data were analysed by Statistical Software for Social Sciences software.
resultTwo hundred patients were randomly selected for induction with oral misoprostol solution. There were no significant differences in substantive outcomes. Vaginal delivery within 24 h was achieved in 80.5 % of patients. The caesarean section rate was 19.5 %. Uterine hyperactivity occurred in 4 % of patients. The response to induction of labour in women with unfavourable cervices (modified Bishop's score <2) was somewhat slower with misoprostol, induction to delivery interval was more, oxytocin requirement was more, and vaginal delivery rate was less.
conclusionThis new approach to oral misoprostol solution administration was successful in achieving vaginal delivery rate in 24 h in 80.5 % of patients; rate of LSCS was less 19.5 %.
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.