Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40912733›Full record

Trial reportBMJ global health2025

Women and clinicians' views, preferences and experiences of caesarean section and vaginal birth in India: a qualitative substudy of the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) trial.

Kate Lightly, Shuchita Mundle, Jaya Tripathy, Pradeep Deshmukh, Beverly Winikoff, Andrew Weeks, Carol Kingdon

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03749902 phase4completednot on this map

A Randomized Trial Comparing Oral Misoprostol Alone with Oral Misoprostol Followed by Oxytocin in Women Induced for Hypertension of Pregnancy

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of LiverpoolRan2020 to 2022Enrolled520ConditionsInduction of LaborArmsOral misoprostol, Oxytocin
NCT04037683 completednot on this map

An Alongside Qualitative Study Exploring Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Expectations and Experiences of Labour Induction With Misoprostol and Oxytocin for Hypertension in Pregnancy in India

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of LiverpoolRan2019 to 2021Enrolled136ConditionsPre-EclampsiaArmsMisoprostol Oral Tablet, Oxytocin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kate LightlyDepartment of Womens and Child Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK klightly@liv.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7604-0891
Shuchita MundleObstetrics and Gynaecology, AIIMS Nagpur, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Jaya TripathyCommunity Medicine, AIIMS Nagpur, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Pradeep DeshmukhCommunity Medicine, AIIMS Nagpur, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Beverly WinikoffGynuity Health Projects, New York, New York, USA.
Andrew WeeksDepartment of Womens and Child Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Carol KingdonDepartment of Womens and Child Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and the Wellcome Trust MR/R006/180/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCaesarean use in India continues to rise and significant disparities exist. However, women and clinicians' views are under-researched. This paper aims to explore women and clinicians' views and preferences for mode of birth in two government hospitals in urban central India.

methodsThis qualitative study involved 53 semistructured interviews with high-risk women before and after induction of labour and eight focus groups with clinicians and researchers in two government hospitals in Maharashtra state. All women were recruited to the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) randomised controlled trial (NCT03749902) and were induced for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis.

resultsInteractions between women, clinicians and families played an important role in women's birth experiences. Most women strongly preferred vaginal birth. While a vaginal birth was important to women for their long-term health and well-being, the safety of the baby was the priority. Both women and clinicians justified caesarean use to promote fetal safety. Contrary to clinicians' perceptions, women clearly understood their caesarean indications. The busy clinical environment was an important factor influencing the clinician's decision and threshold for caesarean. Three themes arose from the data: (1) women's preference for vaginal birth: a matter of 'Trouble for two hours or trouble for two months'; (2) clinicians' perspectives about caesarean use: 'Don't take a risk'; and (3) knowledge through experiences and interactions: 'The pain didn't come'.

conclusionWomen strongly preferred 'normal delivery' but accepted caesarean birth to promote fetal safety. Clinicians felt labour and vaginal birth were often risky and prioritised fetal safety in this under-resourced context. Women who had a caesarean birth understood their indication for caesarean but, compared with vaginal birth, reported that caesarean caused them additional short- and long-term anxiety, health and social concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04037683.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCesarean SectionLabor, InducedOxytocinPatient PreferenceAdultFemaleFocus GroupsHumansIndiaInterviews as TopicOxytocicsPregnancyQualitative ResearchYoung AdultOxytocicsOxytocinGlobal HealthIndiaObstetricsQualitative study

Identifiers

PMID40912733
PMCPMC12414161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.