Observational studyAmerican journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM2023
Outcomes of induction vs prelabor cesarean delivery at <33 weeks for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.
Observational study in American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preeclampsia and eclampsia: Enhanced detection and treatment for morbidity reduction.Best practice & research. Clinical anaesthesiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHypertensive disorders of pregnancy are the leading cause of indicated preterm birth; however, the optimal delivery approach for pregnancies complicated by preterm hypertensive disorders of pregnancy remains uncertain.
objectiveThis study aimed to compare maternal and neonatal morbidity in patients with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy who either went induction of labor or prelabor cesarean delivery at <33 weeks' gestation. In addition, we aimed to quantify the length of induction of labor and rate of vaginal delivery in those who underwent induction of labor. STUDY
designThis is a secondary analysis of an observational study which included 115,502 patients in 25 hospitals in the United States from 2008 to 2011. Patients were included in the secondary analysis if they were delivered for pregnancy associated hypertension (gestational hypertension or preeclampsia) between 23
resultsA total of 471 patients met inclusion criteria, of whom 271 (58%) underwent induction of labor and 200 (42%) underwent prelabor cesarean delivery. Composite maternal morbidity was 10.2% in the induction group and 21.1% in the cesarean delivery group (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.42 [0.25-0.72]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.44 [0.26-0.76]). Neonatal morbidity in the induction group vs the cesarean delivery was 51.9% and 63.8 %, respectively (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.61 [0.42-0.89]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.71 [0.48-1.06]). The frequency of vaginal delivery in the induction group was 53% (95% confidence interval, 46.8-58.7) and the median duration of labor was 13.9 hours (interquartile range, 8.7-22.2). The frequency of vaginal birth was higher in patients at or beyond 29 weeks (39.9% at 24
conclusionAmong patients delivered for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy <33
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.