ArticlePloS one2022
Analysis of spontaneous labor progression of breech presentation at term.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reaching caesarean section rates below 15%: experience of a French tertiary maternity using the Robson classification system.Reproductive health · 2025Observational
- Labor curves based on cervical dilatation over time and their accuracy and effectiveness: A systematic scoping review.PloS one · 2024Article
- Observational
- Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries following breech compared to cephalic vaginal births.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical dilatation curves are widely used to describe normal and abnormal labor progression for cephalic presentation. Labor curves for breech presentations have never been described.
objectivesThe aims of this study were to examine the pattern of labor progression in women with a breech presentation and to determine whether the type of breech or parity can influence the speed of cervical dilatation. STUDY
designWe analyzed the labor data from 349 women with a term, singleton, and breech fetus after spontaneous onset of labor in 2010-2018. Cesarean deliveries were excluded. The patterns of labor progression were described by examining the relationship between the elapsed times from the full dilatation and cervical dilatation stages. Average labor curves were developed using repeated-measures analysis with 3rd degree polynomial modeling. The results were interpreted according to parity and the type of breech.
resultsThe first stage of labor progression was divided into a latency phase from 0 to 5 cm of dilatation and an active phase from 5 to 10 cm. In the active phase, the median speed of cervical dilatation was 1.67 cm/h [1.25, 2.61] (2 cm/h for multipara and 1.54 cm/h for nullipara). The difference by parity was significant in the active phase (p< 0.05). The cervical dilatation rate from 3 cm to 10 cm did not significantly differ between the complete and frank breeches (1.56 cm/h vs 1.75 cm/h, p = 0.48). However, the median cervical dilatation rate from 8 cm to complete dilatation was faster for complete breeches (1.92 cm/h versus 1.33 cm/h, p = 0.045).
conclusionAs with cephalic presentation, the first stage of labor progression for breech presentation can be divided into a latent and active phase. Labor progression should be interpreted with respect to parity, and women should be informed that the type of breech does not seem to influence the cervical dilatation rate when there is adequate management.
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.