ReviewJournal of midwifery & women's health2020
An Integrated Review of Uterine Activity Monitoring for Evaluating Labor Dystocia.
Review in Journal of midwifery & women's health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reduced diaphragmatic function during term labor and its association with second stage of labor: an intrapartum ultrasound study.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Characterizing uterine responsiveness to oxytocin augmentation across four labor patterns in maternal obesity.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2024Article
- Shoulder Dystocia: A Comprehensive Literature Review on Diagnosis, Prevention, Complications, Prognosis, and Management.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- The Relationship Between Uterine Activity, Oxytocin Dosing, Labor Progress, and Mode of Birth in Nulliparas with Obesity: Minimal Usefulness of Montevideo Unit Measurement.Biological research for nursing · 2023Article
- Mucosa-interfacing electronics.Nature reviews. Materials · 2022Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLabor dystocia is the most common cause of cesarean birth in the United States, yet how dystocia develops during labor remains elusive. Uterine activity monitoring has significant potential for advancing our understanding of labor dystocia. While evaluating contraction frequency and amplitude is a common component of labor dystocia management, the literature describing the relationship between measures of uterine activity and labor dystocia is heterogeneous and has not been synthesized to identify the best methods for use in clinical investigation.
methodsWe conducted a literature search for original research exploring the relationship between uterine activity and labor dystocia published between 2000 and 2019. Included articles were critically reviewed and synthesized.
resultsAcross 11 identified studies, investigators employed 3 different techniques for monitoring uterine activity and 9 different measures were employed. Uterine activity measures, including Montevideo units, uterine electromyography power density spectrum and sample entropy, and the fall-to-rise ratio of contraction shape, detected patterns associated with labor dystocia or cesarean birth. DISCUSSION: The use of multiple regression with clinical covariates and a uterine activity measure increased the accuracy of predicting cesarean delivery. Uterine electromyography may be especially useful to evaluate labor dystocia phenotypes to differentiate uterine muscle fatigue from understimulation and lead to algorithms for increased precision in the diagnosis of labor dystocia and innovative approaches to treatment.
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.