ArticleBMJ open2019
Routine induction in late-term pregnancies: follow-up of a Danish induction of labour paradigm.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 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
- Maternity care providers' perspectives on late-term gestation management (LATE-study): A cross-sectional survey.PloS one · 2025Article
- 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
- Outpatient labor induction-Exploring future potential by assessing eligibility in a historical cohort.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Article
- Patterns of oxytocin use for induction and augmentation of labour among healthcare providers in Nigeria.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Article
- Research Update: Healthy Birth Practice #1-Let Labor Begin on Its Own.The Journal of perinatal education · 2023Article
- Outcomes of induction versus spontaneous onset of labour at 40 and 41 GW: findings from a prospective database, Sri Lanka.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Risk of complications in the late vs early days of the 42nd week of pregnancy: A nationwide cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Heterogenous use of misoprostol for induction of labour: results of an online survey among midwives in German-speaking countries.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFor many years, routine elective induction of labour at gestational week (GW) 42+0 has been recommended in Denmark. In 2011, a more proactive protocol was introduced aimed at reducing stillbirths, and practice changed into earlier routine induction, i.e. between 41+3 and 41+5 GW. The present study evaluates a national change in induction of labour regime. The trend of maternal and neonatal consequences are monitored in the preintervention period (2000-2010) compared with the postintervention period (2012-2016).
designA national retrospective register-based cohort study.
settingDenmark.
participantsAll births in Denmark 41+3 to 45+0 GWs between 2000 and 2016 (N = 152 887). OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes: stillbirths, perinatal death, and low Apgar scores. Additional outcomes: birth interventions and maternal outcomes.
resultsFor the primary outcomes, no differences in stillbirths, perinatal death, and low Apgar scores were found comparing the preintervention and postintervention period. Of additional outcomes, the trend changed significantly postintervention concerning use of augmentation of labour, epidural analgesia, induction of labour and uterine rupture (all p<0.05). There was no significant change in the trend for caesarean section and instrumental birth. Most notable for clinical practice was the increase in induction of labour from 41% to 65% (p<0.01) at 41+3 weeks during 2011 as well as the rare occurrence of uterine ruptures (from 2.6 to 4.2 per thousand, p
conclusionsEvaluation of a more proactive regimen recommending induction of labour from GW 41+3 compared with 42+0 using national register data found no differences in neonatal outcomes including stillbirth. The number of women with induced labour increased significantly.
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.