ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Efficacy and safety of double balloon catheter and dinoprostone for labor induction in multipara at term.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Induction of Labor in Late-Term and Post-Term Pregnancies Using Double-Balloon Catheter for Cervical Ripening: Predictors of Prolonged Labor Across Four Combined Augmentation Protocols in a Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Construction of a nomogram model for predicting vaginal birth after induction of labor in pregnant women with fetal growth restriction at term.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Double-Balloon Catheter Alone or Combined with Oxytocin, Dinoprostone, or Misoprostol for Labor Induction in Late- and Post-Term Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to comparatively assess the efficacy and safety of double balloon catheter (DBC) and dinoprostone as labor-inducing agents just for multipara at term.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted among multipara at term with a Bishop score < 6 who needed planned labor induction from January 1, 2020, to December 30, 2020 in Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Hubei province, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology. They were divided into DBC group and dinoprostone group, respectively. Baseline maternal data, maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded for statistical analysis. Total vaginal delivery rate, rate of vaginal delivery within 24 h, rate of uterine hyperstimulation combined with abnormal fetal heart rate(FHR) were regarded as the primary outcome variables. The difference between groups was considered statistically significant when p value < 0.05.
resultsA total of 202 multiparas was included for analysis (95 women in DBC group vs 107 women in dinoprostone group). There were no significant differences in total vaginal delivery rate and rate of vaginal delivery within 24 h between groups. Uterine hyperstimulation combined with abnormal FHR occurred exclusively in dinoprostone group.
conclusionDBC and dinoprostone seem to be equally effective, while, DBC seems to be safer than dinoprostone.
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.