ArticleAJOG global reports2024
Pregnancy outcomes after implementation of an induction of labor care pathway.
Article in AJOG global reports, 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.
- Standardization of labor induction management: A mixed-methods evaluation of the clinician perspective.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Effects of amniotomy combined with oxytocin on cervical ripening and neonatal outcome in patients with oligohydramnios in late pregnancy.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Standardized protocol for labor induction: a type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInduction of labor is common; however, the optimum clinical strategy for induction of labor is less clear. Variations in clinical practices related to induction of labor may lead to increased complications and longer induction of labor times.
objectiveThis study aimed to analyze whether the implementation of an evidence-based standardized care pathway improves the clinical outcomes associated with induction of labor. STUDY
designThis was an approved quality improvement project implementing a clinical care pathway for induction of labor. Moreover, this was a retrospective cohort study of inductions of labor for 5 months before (January 2018 to May 2018) and 14 months after (August 2018 to September 2019) the implementation of the care pathway. The primary outcome was time from admission to delivery. Time from admission to delivery was stratified by mode of delivery. The secondary outcomes included chorioamnionitis, endometritis, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, cesarean delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and a composite of unanticipated outcomes (chorioamnionitis, endometritis, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, cesarean delivery, and postpartum hemorrhage). In addition, pathway adherence was analyzed. The outcomes were analyzed using 2-tailed
resultsA total of 1471 inductions of labor were reviewed, with 392 inductions of labor before the implementation of the care pathway and 1079 inductions of labor after the implementation of the care pathway. The pathway was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the time from admission to delivery by 1.2 hours (from 23.4 to 22.2 hours;
conclusionThe introduction of a standardized induction of labor pathway was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the time from admission to delivery by 1.2 hours and improved pregnancy outcomes, including decreased infections and unanticipated outcomes. Further opportunities for improvements in clinical outcomes may be realized with increased compliance with the care pathway.
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.