ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes of Elective Induction of Labor at 39 or More Weeks: A Prospective, Observational Study.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Value of Abdominal Subcutaneous Fat Thickness for Dinoprostone-Induced Labor Success in Obese Pregnant Women: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Labor Induction versus Expectant Management: Evaluating Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- The rising tide: Trends in induction of labor at term over a 5-year period at a single centre.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Observational
- Late vs. early intrauterine blood transfusion in fetal anemia: impact on maternal and neonatal outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Trends in labor induction and perinatal outcomes: A decade comparison before and after the ARRIVE trial.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of our study is to compare the maternal and neonatal outcomes of induction of labor (IOL) versus expectant management at 39 weeks of gestation. We conducted a single-centered, prospective, observational study of nulliparous singleton women at 39 weeks or more. We compared the maternal and perinatal outcomes. Of 408 nulliparous women, 132 women were IOL group and 276 women were expectant management group. IOL and expectant group had similar cesarean delivery rate (18.2% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.570). The delivery time from admission was longer in IOL group (834 ± 527 vs. 717 ± 469 min, p = 0.040). The IOL group was less likely to have Apgar score at 5 min < 7 than in expectant group (0.8% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.023). Multivariate analysis showed that IOL at 39 weeks was not an independent risk factor for cesarean delivery (relative risk 0.64, 95% confidence interval: 0.28−1.45, p = 0.280). Maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes, including cesarean delivery rate, were similar to women in IOL at 39 weeks of gestation compared to expectant management in nulliparous women. IOL at 39 weeks of gestation could be recommended even when the indication of IOL is not definite.
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.