Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37164487›Full record

Observational studyAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2023

Latent phase duration and associated outcomes: a contemporary, population-based observational study.

Ellen L Tilden, Aaron B Caughey, Mia Ahlberg, Louise Lundborg, Anna-Karin Wikström, Xingrong Liu, Kevin Ng, Jodi Lapidus, Anna Sandström

Open access · bronzeAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Among patients undergoing induction who reach active phase, does prolonged latent phase matter?The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Ellen L TildenDepartment of Nurse-Midwifery, Oregon Health & Science University School of Nursing, Portland, OR; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR. Electronic address: tildene@ohsu.edu.
Aaron B CaugheyDepartment of Nurse-Midwifery, Oregon Health & Science University School of Nursing, Portland, OR; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.
Mia AhlbergClinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Division of Obstetrics, Department of Women's Health, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Louise LundborgClinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anna-Karin WikströmDivision of Obstetrics, Department of Women's Health, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Xingrong LiuClinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kevin NgSchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University and Portland State University, Portland, OR.
Jodi LapidusSchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University and Portland State University, Portland, OR.
Anna SandströmDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR; Clinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Division of Obstetrics, Department of Women's Health, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SEKarolinska University Hospital · SEOregon Health & Science University · USPortland State University · USUppsala University · SE

Funding

NICHD NIH HHS L30 HD094535
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about the latent phase of labor, including whether its duration influences subsequent labor processes or birth outcomes.

objectiveThis study aimed to describe the duration of the latent phase of labor from self-report of the onset of painful contractions to a cervical dilation of 5 cm in a large, Swedish population and evaluate the association between the duration of the latent phase of labor and perinatal processes and outcomes that occurred during the active phase of labor, second stage of labor, birth and immediately after delivery, stratified by parity. STUDY

designThis was a population-based cohort study of 67,267 pregnancies with deliveries between 2008 and 2020 in the Stockholm-Gotland Regions, Sweden. Nulliparous and parous women without a history of cesarean delivery in spontaneous labor with a term (≥37 weeks of gestation), singleton, live, and vertex fetus without major malformations were included. Imputation was used if the notation of the end of the latent phase of labor (ie, cervical dilation of 5 cm) was missing in the partograph. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association with adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals, controlling for potential covariates.

resultsIncluding the time from painful contraction onset to a cervical dilation of 5 cm, the median durations of the latent phase of labor were 16.0 (interquartile range, 10.0-26.6) hours for nulliparous women and 9.4 (interquartile range, 5.9-15.3) hours for multiparous women. The durations of the latent phase of labor beyond the median were associated with increased odds of labor dystocia diagnosis during the first stage active phase or second stage of labor and interventions commonly associated with dystocia (amniotomy, oxytocin augmentation, epidural, and cesarean delivery). The duration of the latent phase of labor of ≥90th percentile vs less than the median in nulliparous women demonstrated an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes (Apgar score of <7 at 5 minutes and neonatal intensive care unit admission), chorioamnionitis, and fetal occiput posterior. In multiparous women, longer duration of the latent phase of labor was associated with an increased risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission and chorioamnionitis but was not associated with an Apgar score of <7 at 5 minutes. The duration of the latent phase of labor was not associated with additional markers of maternal risk.

conclusionThe duration of the latent phase of labor in nulliparous women was longer than that of multiparous women at each point of distribution. A longer duration of the latent phase of labor was associated with more frequent dystocia diagnoses and related interventions during the first stage active phase or second stage of labor, including cesarean delivery, nulliparous fetal occiput posterior position, chorioamnionitis, and markers of neonatal morbidity. More research is needed to identify potential mediating paths between the duration of the latent phase of labor and neonatal morbidity.

Indexed as

ChorioamnionitisDystociaCohort StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornLabor PresentationParityPregnancyRetrospective Studiesactive phase of laborlabor durationlabor dystocialatent phase of labor

Identifiers

PMID37164487
PMCPMC10172685
OpenAlexW4324351615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.