Trial reportActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
Motivations for and experience with labor induction at 39 weeks in women with obesity-A qualitative study.
Trial report in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. 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.
- Motivations for and experience with labor induction at 39 weeks in women with obesity-A qualitative study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Trial
- Women's Experiences of Induction of Labor and Birth After Prolonged Medical Induction: A Qualitative Study From Denmark.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTiming of induction of labor (IOL) at term has been investigated in multiple settings. In Denmark, the 'When to INDuce for OverWeight' (WINDOW) study compares IOL at 39 weeks of gestation vs expectant management in low-risk women with obesity. However, knowledge on women's expectations of and experience with IOL is sparse. The aim of this study was to explore women's motivation to join the WINDOW study and their experience when randomized to IOL at 39 gestational weeks. MATERIAL AND
methodsA qualitative interview study of 25 pregnant women with obesity randomized in the WINDOW study to IOL at 39 weeks of gestation was conducted. Participants were recruited from four hospitals in Central Denmark Region and were interviewed four to six weeks after giving birth. A thematic analysis was performed using a phenomenological approach.
resultsThe analysis resulted in three main themes, (1) Motivation for IOL, (2) The IOL process, and (3) IOL in recollection and in the future. Participants perceived inclusion into the WINDOW study as a "great opportunity," as they hoped to be randomized to IOL at 39 weeks of gestation. Their main motivation for participating was physical discomfort in late pregnancy and a wish for "knowing" the timing of the birth. BMI-related risk factors were mentioned by few as a motivating factor. Some participants described the IOL process as a team effort between the couple and the midwives and were positive towards future IOL. Others associated the IOL process with prolonged labor or described the body as "reluctant" to respond to the induction regime. A desire to experience spontaneous onset of labor in a future pregnancy was mentioned.
conclusionsPhysical discomfort and wanting to "control" the onset of labor were main motivations for women's decision to participate in the WINDOW study, hoping they would be allocated for IOL. Comprehensive information and being supported by midwives through the IOL process was crucial for a positive IOL experience. Some participants were positive towards a future IOL. Others speculated if their body was not ready for birth in 39 weeks of gestation and/or associated the IOL process with a challenging labor.
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.