ReviewMaternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)2026
An Appraisal of Labor Augmentation: An Update on Current Evidence and Practice.
Review in Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Augmentation of labor remains the cornerstone of intrapartum care, typically employed to expedite delivery by enhancing the frequency, strength, and duration of uterine contractions. The decision to augment depends on the stage of labor and the woman's obstetric history. While up to half of all women who enter spontaneous or induced labor may require augmentation, its use is not without risk. Although augmentation in nulliparous women during the first stage of labor is generally uncontroversial, its application in multiparous women, during the second stage of labor, in breech presentation, or in women who have had a previous cesarean section remains contentious. Emerging debate also surrounds whether oxytocin should be routinely discontinued once active labor is established. In this review, we appraise contemporary evidence on the diagnosis of labor dystocia, indications, and methods for labor augmentation, outcomes, complications, and areas of clinical uncertainty. Current international guidelines are compared, and evidence-based recommendations are provided. We conclude by highlighting unresolved areas that warrant further research to inform future policy and clinical practice.
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.