ArticlePloS one2026
Effects of different oral intake management during labor on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFasting or restricting oral intake during labor may adversely affect maternal and neonatal outcomes. Although several interventions regarding oral intake during labor have been proposed, the optimal strategy for clinical practice remains controversial. This study aims to conduct a network meta-analysis to identify the most effective intervention for managing maternal oral intake during labor. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search will be conducted in the following electronic databases: Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and VIP Database, from database inception until January 2026. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating oral intake interventions during labor will be included. The primary outcomes include vaginal delivery rate, operative vaginal delivery, caesarean section, 10-minute Apgar score, and neonatal hypoglycemia. Secondary outcomes include maternal and neonatal outcomes. Maternal outcomes include duration of labor, ketoacidosis, maternal hypoglycemia, postpartum hemorrhage, vomiting rate, Mendelson's syndrome, maternal thirst and hunger sensations, and maternal satisfaction. Neonatal outcomes include fetal distress, neonatal jaundice, umbilical cord blood pH < 7.2, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment will be conducted independently by two reviewers, and disagreements will be resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan 5.4 where appropriate; otherwise, subgroup analyses or descriptive analyses will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will not involve individual patient data and therefore does not require ethical approval. The findings of this systematic review and network meta-analysis will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at relevant academic conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42025630953.
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.