ArticleResearch in health services & regions2025
Practice variation in induction of labour: women's role in the decision-making process.
Article in Research in health services & regions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
In the Netherlands, percentages of induction of labour (IOL) range from 14.3 to 41.1% in regional maternity care networks (MCNs). In this study, we focus on women's contribution in explaining this variation in range. We examine if different factors at the level of the individual woman (micro) and the level of the woman's social context (meso) are related to decision-making on IOL, and the variation. We used an online questionnaire inviting women counselled for IOL (n = 180, response rate 40%) from six different MCNs, three with a high and three with a low percentage of IOL. Factors included are, for example, attitude towards birth, reason for IOL, and social norms. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were performed to examine the relation between the included factors and the intended decision on IOL. Our results show that only the factor women's attitude towards birth is related to the intended decision on IOL. The more women believe that birth is a medical process, the higher the odds that the intended decision is to induce labour. This may contribute to variation in IOL between individual women, but appears to contribute less to variation in IOL between MCNs. This is because the percentages of women with an intended decision for IOL do not differ within MCNs with a low or high percentage of IOL. A next step in explaining practice variation, is to examine mechanisms at the level of the individual healthcare provider (micro) and the MCN (meso).
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.