ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Effect of induction of labor mode on pregnancy outcome in full-term GBS colonization pregnant women.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of different labor induction methods on pregnancy outcomes in full-term pregnant women with group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonization.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled primipara with singleton pregnancies. According to the presence or absence of GBS colonization at 35–37 weeks’ gestation, we divided the cohort into the GBS colonization and non-GBS colonization groups. These groups were further subdivided into the cervical balloon dilation and oxytocin subgroups according to the method of labor induction, and the outcomes in these subgroups were compared with those of spontaneous labor.
resultsAmong women with GBS colonization, those in the cervical dilation balloon subgroup exhibited significantly higher rates of maternal infection (18.9%) and intrapartum fever ≥ 38℃ (34%) than those in the spontaneous labor subgroup (both P < 0.05). Cesarean section rates were higher in both the cervical balloon dilation (22.6%) and oxytocin subgroups (17.6%) than in the spontaneous labor subgroup (6.2%, both P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed among the cervical balloon dilation, oxytocin, and spontaneous labor subgroups regarding neonatal intensive care unit admission rates and the proportion of offspring with 1-min Apgar score < 7.
conclusionsIn this cohort of GBS-colonized women, the method of labor induction influenced outcomes. The use of a cervical dilation balloon was associated with increased maternal infection and a higher cesarean section rate, the latter likely attributable to the obstetric indications for induction rather than GBS status itself. Neither induction method increased neonatal adverse 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.