Elective induction of labour in low risk nulliparous women at term: Caution is needed.

Tullio Ghi, Andrea Dall'Asta, Stefania Fieni

Abstract readComment

In one paragraph

Article in European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

2citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

Study protocol FRENCH-ARRIVE: labor induction in low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation to reduce cesarean births: a randomized trial of induction versus expectant management in France.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026
Trial
Maternal perceptions of the experience of attempted labor induction and medically elective inductions: analysis of survey results from listening to mothers in California.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

Comment on
Term Elective Induction of Labor and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Obese Women and Their Offspring.2018

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tullio GhiDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Unit of Surgical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Parma, Parma, Italy. Electronic address: tullio.ghi@unipr.it.

Andrea Dall'AstaDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Unit of Surgical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.

Stefania FieniDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Unit of Surgical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recently published ARRIVE trial demonstrated that "policies aimed at the avoidance of elective labour induction among low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation are unlikely to reduce the rate of caesarean delivery on a population level". In this commentary we discuss some controversial aspects of the study that in our opinion may undermine its validity at wide population level.

Indexed as

Labor, ObstetricPregnancy OutcomeCesarean SectionFemaleHumansLabor, InducedObesityPregnancyHypertension in pregnancyLow risk pregnancyObesity in pregnancyRisk assessment in pregnancyTerm pregnancy

Identifiers

PMID31195165

DOI10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.05.037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.