ArticlePloS one2025
Development and preliminary validation of the GebStart-tool for advising nulliparous women in early labour.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Potential benefits of applying the GebStart-tool for advising primiparous women during early labor: A comparative study.European journal of midwifery · 2026Article
- The application of a tool for supporting shared decision making in primiparous women during early labour - a descriptive survey of obstetric health care professionals' opinion.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNulliparous women in early labour are unsure when to go to hospital. The aim of this study was to develop and preliminary validate a tool for advising for or against hospital admission.
methodsWe developed the preliminary long version of the GebStart-tool with 32 items based on focus group discussions and a scoping review. It was applied in a multicentre study with n = 394 women during their contact with the hospital. Because of the formative and complex character of the GebStart-tool, factor analysis was not appropriate. Instead, items were subdivided deductively into the domains 'Physical symptoms', 'Emotional state', Self-management' and 'Resources'. Distribution of response options, adjusted Cox regressions with time intervals describing care needs as outcomes and adjusted multinomial regression with the outcome 'Care decision' were used to reduce items and for preliminary validation.
resultsThe reduced GebStart-tool contained 15 items and cutoff points at 22 and 33 points. The total score of the instrument was significantly associated with all time intervals describing care needs (duration between completion of the tool and hospital admission (HR = 1.08, 95% CI [1.05-1.10], p < 0.001), onset of active labour (HR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.04-1.08], p < 0.001), first use of medical pain management (HR = 1.08, 95% CI [1.06-1.11], p < 0.001), first use of alternative pain management (HR = 1.08, 95% CI [1.05-1.10], p < 0.001)). However, a higher total score of the reduced GebStart-tool was not significantly associated with a reduced risk for the decision 'Stay at home' (RR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.94-1.02], p = 0.421), but with a significantly higher risk for the decision 'Hospital admission' (RR = 1.13, 95% CI [1.05-1.22], p = 0.001) compared to 'Keep in contact'.
conclusionWe developed a practical instrument with 15 items based on scientific evidence. Further research of the GebStart-tool in larger samples is necessary. Moreover, the use in clinical practice accompanied by implementation research and translation into other languages should be envisaged.
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.