Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2019
Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 99 citations in OpenAlex.
- Induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks: A systematic review and an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials.PLoS medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Induction of labour at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Comparison of balloon catheter, oral misoprostol, or combination of both for cervical ripening in late-term and post-term nulliparous women: A Finnish randomized controlled multicenter pilot trial.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Trial
- Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Trial
- Article
- Induction of labour versus expectant management after one previous caesarean birth maternal and neonatal outcomes in a population-based cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Trends in risk factors associated with the increasing labor induction rate: A nationwide register study in Finland 2005-2023.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Assessing the impact of indication for labor induction on delivery outcomes: a five-year cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Severe Postpartum Hemorrhage in Vaginal Delivery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026Article
- Patient and public involvement (PPI) reporting in maternal and neonatal clinical trials: an exploratory review.Trials · 2026Review
- Article
- Association between induction of labor and birth experience: A national population-based study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Timing of Term Births and Associated Mortality Risks: Ecological Analysis Across 28 European Countries.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Machine learning prediction models for mode of delivery in prolonged pregnancies in Sweden.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Balancing harm and benefit for induction of labor at 41 weeks: Slow acting is the problem.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Trends in induction of labour and associated co-morbidities and demographics in Queensland, Australia from 2001 to 2020: a population-based study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Maternal postpartum infection risk following induction of labor: A Danish national cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Article
- Maternal and perinatal outcomes after implementation of a more active management in late- and postterm pregnancies in Sweden: A population-based cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
- Maternity care providers' perspectives on late-term gestation management (LATE-study): A cross-sectional survey.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in low risk women.
designOpen label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.
setting123 primary care midwifery practices and 45 hospitals (secondary care) in the Netherlands, 2012-16.
participants1801 low risk women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: randomised to induction (n=900) or to expectant management until 42 weeks (n=901).
interventionsInduction at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks with induction if necessary. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity (Apgar score <7 at five minutes, arterial pH <7.05, meconium aspiration syndrome, plexus brachialis injury, intracranial haemorrhage, and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Secondary outcomes included maternal outcomes and mode of delivery. The null hypothesis that expectant management is inferior to induction was tested with a non-inferiority margin of 2%.
resultsMedian gestational age at delivery was 41 weeks+0 days (interquartile range 41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+1 day) for the induction group and 41 weeks+2 days (41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+5 days) for the expectant management group. The primary outcome was analysed for both the intention-to-treat population and the per protocol population. In the induction group, 15/900 (1.7%) women had an adverse perinatal outcome versus 28/901 (3.1%) in the expectant management group (absolute risk difference -1.4%, 95% confidence interval -2.9% to 0.0%, P=0.22 for non-inferiority). 11 (1.2%) infants in the induction group and 23 (2.6%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <7 at five minutes (relative risk (RR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.98). No infants in the induction group and three (0.3%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <4 at five minutes. One fetal death (0.1%) occurred in the induction group and two (0.2%) in the expectant management group. No neonatal deaths occurred. 3 (0.3%) neonates in the induction group versus 8 (0.9%) in the expectant management group were admitted to an NICU (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.41). No significant difference was found in composite adverse maternal outcomes (induction n=122 (13.6%)
conclusionsThis study could not show non-inferiority of expectant management compared with induction of labour in women with uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks; instead a significant difference of 1.4% was found for risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in favour of induction, although the chances of a good perinatal outcome were high with both strategies and the incidence of perinatal mortality, Apgar score <4 at five minutes, and NICU admission low.
trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NTR3431.
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.