Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35830435›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Prediction of spontaneous onset of labor at term (PREDICT study): Research protocol.

Federico Migliorelli, Ludovica Ferrero, Catherine McCarey, Sara Marcenaro, Véronique Othenin-Girard, Antonina Chilin, Begoña Martinez de Tejada

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05109247 (Prediction of Spontaneous Onset of Labor at Term), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT05109247 completednot on this map

Prediction of Spontaneous Onset of Labor at Term

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity Hospital, GenevaRan2019 to 2022Enrolled429ConditionsLabor, Induced, Labor, Obstetric, Labor Onset, Predictive Model
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Labor induction at 41Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024
    Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Federico MigliorelliDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2185-369X
Ludovica FerreroDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Catherine McCareyDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Sara MarcenaroDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Véronique Othenin-GirardDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Antonina ChilinDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Begoña Martinez de TejadaDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent studies have shown that elective induction of labor versus expectant management after 39 weeks of pregnancy result in lower incidence of perinatal complications, while the proportion of cesarean deliveries remains stable, or even decreases. Still, evidence regarding collateral consequences of the potential increase of induction of labor procedures is still lacking. Also, the results of these studies must be carefully interpreted and thoroughly counter-balanced with women's thoughts and opinions regarding the active management of the last weeks of pregnancy. Therefore, it may be useful to develop a tool that aids in the decision-making process by differentiating women who will spontaneously go into labor from those who will require induction.

objectiveTo develop a predictive model to calculate the probability of spontaneous onset of labor at term.

methodsWe designed a prospective national multicentric observational study including women enrolled at 39 weeks of gestation, carrying singleton pregnancies. After signing an informed consent form, several clinical, ultrasonographic, biophysical and biochemical variables will be collected by trained staff. If delivery has not occurred at 40 weeks of pregnancy, a second visit and evaluation will be performed. Prenatal care will be continued according to current hospital guidelines. Once recruitment is completed, the information gathered will be used to develop a logistic regression-based predictive model of spontaneous onset of labor between 39 and 41 weeks of gestation. A secondary exploration of the data collected at 40 weeks, as well as a survival analysis regarding time-to-delivery outcomes will also be performed. A total sample of 429 participants is needed for the expected number of events.

conclusionThis study aims to develop a model which may help in the decision-making process during follow-up of the last weeks of pregnancy.

trial registrationNCT05109247 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Indexed as

Labor, InducedLabor, ObstetricCesarean SectionFemaleGestational AgeHumansObservational Studies as TopicPregnancyProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID35830435
PMCPMC9278770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.