ReviewCureus2024
A Systematic Review of the Use of Routine Versus Selective Episiotomy for Vaginal Birth.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Episiotomy on Postpartum Pain, Pelvic Floor Function, and Sexual Health: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study and Prediction Model Development.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes and practices of Brazilian obstetricians in relation to childbirth care.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Episiotomy and the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury in nulliparous women with a prolonged second stage.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Selective episiotomy guided by a perineal evaluation form for forceps-assisted vaginal delivery: a retrospective cohort study on maternal and neonatal outcomes.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Predictive Factors of Pelvic Organ Prolapse and the Quality of Life Among Jordanian Women: A Case-Control Study.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Episiotomy is a common obstetric surgical procedure involving an incision to enlarge the vaginal opening, facilitating the delivery of the fetus during the second stage of labor. Hence, the current review was conducted to assess the impact of using selective versus routine episiotomy during vaginal birth on birth outcomes. This systematic review used the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for systematic reviews and research syntheses. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and SCOPUS were searched for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data from relevant studies. Four studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. The findings suggest selective episiotomy is associated with better maternal and fetal outcomes than routine episiotomy in certain contexts. However, results varied, indicating the importance of tailoring episiotomy practices to specific patient populations and healthcare settings. To conclude, the review supports the use of selective episiotomy over routine episiotomy during vaginal birth, as it is associated with fewer adverse maternal outcomes.
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.