ArticleMedical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran2025
The Impact of Dexamethasone Administration on Labor Progression in Pregnant Women: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial.
Article in Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Intravaginal magnesium sulfate as an alternative to intravenous dexamethasone for labor acceleration: first direct comparison in a bayesian adaptive trial.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of dexamethasone in labor progression during the latent and active phases has been widely debated. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of dexamethasone on labor progression, delivery outcomes, and neonatal health. Methods: This multicenter, randomized controlled trial included 4 groups of pregnant individuals: (1) the first group-intervention in the active phase receiving dexamethasone; (2) the second group-intervention in the latent phase receiving dexamethasone; (3) the third group-control in the active phase; and (4) the fourth group-control in the latent phase. Participants were randomly assigned to each group. The primary outcomes were time from the latent phase to the active phase, duration of active labor, cervical dilation rate, and time from intervention to delivery. Secondary outcomes included cesarean section rate, adverse events (vaginal bleeding, fetal heart rate [FHR)] decelerations), and neonatal outcomes (Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity and Respiration [APGAR] scores and neonatal intensive care unit [NICU] admissions). Statistical analyses included 1-way analysis of variance for normally distributed variables, the Kruskal-Wallis test for non-normally distributed variables, chi-square and Fisher exact tests for categorical data, and Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Results: A total of 120 participants were enrolled, with 75 in each group. The first group had the shortest time from the latent to active phase (4.85 hours, 95% CI: 4.32-5.38) and the shortest duration of active labor (1.91 hours, 95% CI: 1.52-2.30), compared to the other groups ( Conclusion: Dexamethasone administration during the active phase of labor significantly shortened the time from the latent phase to active labor, reduced the duration of active labor, and enhanced cervical dilation rate, without adversely affecting neonatal health or increasing adverse events. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and assess the long-term effects on both maternal and neonatal outcomes.
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.