Trial reportActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2024
Labor induction at 41
Trial report in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of balloon catheter, oral misoprostol, or combination of both for cervical ripening in late-term and post-term nulliparous women: A Finnish randomized controlled multicenter pilot trial.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Trial
- Labor induction at 41Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Trial
- 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
- Perinatal death in the Nordic countries in relation to gestational age: The impact of registration practice.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNeonatal and maternal risks increase in term pregnancy as gestational age advances and become increasingly evident post-term. Management practices of late- and post-term pregnancies vary, and the optimal time point for intervention by labor induction is yet to be determined. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis randomized controlled trial of 381 nulliparous women with unripe cervices compared labor induction at 41
resultsThe rates of CS (16.7% [n = 31] vs. 24.1% [n = 47], RR 0.7 [95% CI: 0.5-1.0], p = 0.07) and a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (9.7% [n = 18] vs. 14.4% [n = 28], RR 0.7 [95% CI: 0.4-1.2] p = 0.16) did not significantly differ between the groups, but the operative delivery rate was lower in the early induction group than in the expectant management group (30.6% [n = 57] vs. 45.6% [n = 89], p = 0.003). The rates of hemorrhage ≥1000 mL and neonatal weight ≥4000 g were also lower in the early induction group, as was the vacuum extraction rate in women with vaginal delivery. Of the women with expectant management, 45.6% (n = 89) had spontaneous onset of labor. No perinatal deaths occurred, but one case of eclampsia appeared in the expectant management group.
conclusionsOffering labor induction to nulliparous women at 41
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.