Observational studyScientific reports2023
Neonatal outcomes of elective labor induction in low-risk term pregnancies.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Appraisal of Labor Augmentation: An Update on Current Evidence and Practice.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026Review
- Fetomaternal Outcomes of Induced versus Spontaneous Labor in an Urban Omani Hospital.Oman medical journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with Singleton pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Induction of labour outcomes in a tertiary hospital: the Ghanaian cervix and misoprostol 25ug (GCAM-25 STUDY)-a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Maternal and perinatal outcomes after implementation of a more active management in late- and postterm pregnancies in Sweden: A population-based cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
- Trends in labor induction and perinatal outcomes: A decade comparison before and after the ARRIVE trial.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
- Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes of Labor Induction in Parous Women in a Selected Hospital in Sudan.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciencesArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rate of labor induction has increased in recent years. The results of previously conducted studies examining associations between elective induction of labor (IOL) and neonatal outcomes have been contradictory. The aim of this study was to examine the intrinsic neonatal risks following IOL. We conducted a population-based cohort study, including all women with recorded low-risk singleton pregnancies at a gestational age between 37 + 0 and 41 + 6 weeks in Sweden from 1999 to 2017. Data were collected from the Swedish Medical Birth register. Two study groups were compared-the elective induction group with the spontaneous labor onset group. The results showed that the rate of elective IOL increased from 7.2% in 1999 to 16.4% in 2017. Elective IOL was associated with a higher OR for chorioamnionitis, bacterial sepsis, intracranial hemorrhage, assisted ventilation, hyperbilirubinemia, APGAR < 7 at 5 min, and neonatal seizures compared to deliveries with spontaneous labor onset. Regarding mortality outcomes, no significant differences were shown between the groups for either early term or full-term deliveries. We conclude that IOL is associated with neonatal complications, although causality could not be established in this observational study. It is important to be aware of the increased risk and perform IOL with caution.
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.