Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41506762›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Optimal timing of induction of labour to improve maternal and perinatal outcomes: protocol for an individual participant data and network meta-analysis.

Hollie Meacham, Abraham Ona-Igbru, Rachel McNeill, Ruth Ajayi, Emily Pickering, William A Grobman, Mairead Black, Asma Khalil, Christine Mccourt, Angela Miranda and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Hollie MeachamDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Liverpool, England, UK H.L.Meacham@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-0445-3940
Abraham Ona-IgbruDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Liverpool, England, UK.
Rachel McNeillDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Liverpool, England, UK.
Ruth AjayiPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Representative, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-0499-9742
Emily PickeringPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Representative, Birmingham, UK.
William A GrobmanDivision of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Brown University Warren Alpert Medical School, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Mairead BlackAberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Asma KhalilFetal Medicine Unit, St George's University of London, London, England, UK.
Christine MccourtCentre for Maternal and Child Health Research, University of London, London, UK.
Angela MirandaClinical Biostatistics Unit, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Ben W MolDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8337-550X
Kate WalkerCentre for Perinatal Research, University of Nottingham School of Medicine, Nottingham, England, UK.
Amie WilsonDepartment of International Public Health, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, England, UK.
Javier ZamoraClinical Biostatistics Unit, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Shakila ThangaratinamDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Liverpool, England, UK.
John AlloteyDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Liverpool, England, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite advances in maternity care, stillbirth remains a major burden. It disproportionately affects black and Asian mothers, those with obesity and women over the age of 35 years. Induction of labour may benefit these women, but there is no clear evidence to guide recommendations on optimal timing of induction because of variations in the intervention and insufficient power in primary trials for rare outcomes such as stillbirth and perinatal mortality, or to assess whether effects differ by maternal characteristics. We will conduct an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised trials to assess the overall and differential effect of induction of labour, according to timing of induction and maternal characteristics, on adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes. We will also rank induction of labour timing strategies by their effectiveness to inform clinical and policy decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will identify randomised trials on induction of labour by searching MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, BIOSIS, LILACS, Pascal, SCI, CDSR, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, ISRCTN registry, CENTRAL, DARE and Health Technology Assessment Database, without language restrictions, from inception to June 2025. Primary researchers of identified trials will be invited to join the OPTIMAL Collaboration and share the original trial data. Data integrity and trustworthiness assessment will be performed on all eligible trials. We will check each study's IPD for consistency with the original authors before standardising and harmonising the data. Study quality of included trials will be assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We will perform a series of one-and-two-stage random-effects meta-analyses to obtain the summary intervention effect on composite adverse perinatal outcome (stillbirth, neonatal death or severe morbidity requiring admission to neonatal unit) with 95% CIs and summary treatment-covariate interactions (maternal age, ethnicity, parity, socioeconomic status, body mass index and method of conception). Heterogeneity will be summarised using tau ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251066346) and ethics approval is not required. We will disseminate findings widely to women, healthcare professionals and policymakers through academic, professional bodies and social media channels, and in peer-reviewed journals to achieve impact. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251066346.

Indexed as

Labor, InducedPregnancy OutcomeAdultFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMeta-Analysis as TopicNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicPerinatal MortalityPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignStillbirthSystematic Reviews as TopicTime FactorsMeta-AnalysisMortalityNetwork Meta-AnalysisOBSTETRICSPregnancyPregnant Women

Identifiers

PMID41506762
PMCPMC13059840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.