Observational studyInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2025
The rising tide: Trends in induction of labor at term over a 5-year period at a single centre.
Observational study in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 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.
- The rising tide: Trends in induction of labor at term over a 5-year period at a single centre.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Observational
- Trends in labor induction and perinatal outcomes: A decade comparison before and after the ARRIVE trial.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInduction of labor (IOL) is a controversial topic in contemporary obstetric practice, with some suggesting that the increase in elective induction (eIOL) as a potential contributor to increasing cesarean delivery (CD) rates. The objectives of this single-center study were to examine the rates of IOL, trends in indications for IOL, and the contribution of IOL to the overall CD rate at one of Europe's largest obstetric hospitals.
methodsThis retrospective observational cohort study evaluated the outcomes of patients who were delivered following IOL from 2018 to 2022 inclusive at the largest obstetric hospital in Ireland.
resultsA total of 36 938 women (16 155 nulliparous and 20 783 multiparous) were delivered during the 5-year study period, of whom 8072 nulliparous and 6343 multiparous women underwent IOL. There was a significant increase in rates of induction, increasing from 42% to 57% (P <0.001) in nulliparous women, and from 27% to 33% (P < 0.001) in multiparous women. The highest contributions to the hospital CD rate were from those being induced for 'fetal' (5%), spontaneous rupture of membranes ('SROM') (4%), and 'maternal' (4%) reasons, with the lowest CD rates in the eIOL category (<1%) in both groups.
conclusionOur data confirm that the rate of IOL is increasing. The contribution of maternal and fetal reasons for IOL to the overall CD rate may reflect increasing numbers of higher-risk pregnancies. Despite current controversy regarding the role of eIOL, our data do not confirm a significant contribution to either the overall IOL or CD rates in this center.
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.