ArticleInternational journal of women's health2024
Predictive Factors for the Success of Vaginal Dinoprostone for the Induction of Labour.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Misoprostol for labor induction: an alternative to dinoprostone? A retrospective observational study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Observational
- Labor Induction Outcomes and Short-Term Safety of Controlled-Release Vaginal Dinoprostone in Women Beyond 36 Weeks of Gestation: A Prospective Observational Study in Vietnam.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate factors predictive of the success of a slow-release dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening. Methods: This retrospective study included 187 women who received dinoprostone vaginal inserts for cervical ripening. The participants were divided into two groups: the transvaginal delivery group (n = 87) and cesarean section termination group (n = 100). The correlation between the parameters present before cervical ripening with dinoprostone slow release and its success, as well as complications and adverse outcomes, was analyzed. Cesarean section predictors and area under the curve (AUC) were compared between the two Groups. Results: There were statistical differences between the two groups in body mass index (BMI), height, cervical Bishop score, cephalic position, time of medication use, and fetal head position at the time of medication use ( Conclusion: The combined model was a better predictor of cesarean section in dinoprostone vaginal inserts for cervical ripening and labor induction. The success of cervical ripening with a dinoprostone slow-release vaginal insert can be predicted by the factors that can be recognized at admission.
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.