ReviewCureus2025
Artificial Rupture of Membranes and Spontaneous Rupture of Membranes: A Systematic Review of Feto-Maternal Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding maternal pain and psychological vulnerabilities associated with the development of sub-acute pain after childbirth.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Caul birth: A retrospective cohort study on prevalence, predictors, and maternal and neonatal outcomes.European journal of midwifery · 2026Article
- Fetal head station during artificial rupture of membranes: a large retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial rupture of membranes (ARM), or amniotomy, is a frequently conducted technique for labor acceleration and dystocia prevention without adverse feto-maternal outcomes in women with spontaneous labor. However, in the literature, there has been controversy concerning the regular application of this technique. Therefore, the present systematic review was conducted to evaluate and compare the effect of ARM and spontaneous rupture of membrane (SRM) on feto-maternal outcomes. With the specified keywords, "spontaneous rupture of membrane," "artificial rupture of membrane," AND "active phase of labor" a literature search was conducted on ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases between 2019 and 2024 for the inculcation of appropriate studies. Based on the eligibility criteria, five studies were included. The results revealed that the duration of labor was significantly reduced in the women with ARM compared to SRM, without an increment of the risk of fetal or maternal adverse outcomes. Hence, ARM can be a safe and cost-effective intervention in certain clinical scenarios, but selective rather than routine implementation may offer more balanced outcomes in labor management.
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.