ArticleOman medical journal2026
Fetomaternal Outcomes of Induced versus Spontaneous Labor in an Urban Omani Hospital.
Article in Oman medical journal, 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
Objectives: Induction of labor (IOL) is a common obstetric procedure with ongoing debate about its safety and efficacy. This study compared fetal and maternal outcomes between women who underwent IOL and those who experienced spontaneous labor. Methods: This retrospective comparative study included 260 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies planned for vaginal delivery at Armed Forces Hospital, Muscat, divided into 130 women who underwent IOL and 130 who had spontaneous labor. Data were extracted from their hospital records. The fetomaternal outcomes of interest were mode of delivery, duration of labor stages, maternal complications, neonate's Apgar score, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, duration of hospital stay, and status at discharge. Results: The IOL rate was 18.2%. Compared with spontaneous labor, cesarean delivery and operative vaginal delivery were significantly higher in the IOL group (26.2% vs. 14.6% and 10.0% vs. 6.9%) respectively; (p = 0.031). Fetal distress was the leading indication for the operative deliveries (49.1%). Women with previous cesarean section had a significantly higher rate of operative delivery (p = 0.030). Maternal and neonatal complications were low and similar between the groups. The admission-to-delivery interval and total duration of hospital stay in hours were also significantly longer in induced parturients (33:58 ± 27:20 vs. 8:49 ± 13:09, p = 0.001 and 90:44 ± 57:00 vs 63:12 ± 98:29, p = 0.008, respectively). Conclusions: Although IOL is associated with an increased risk of operative delivery, overall fetomaternal outcomes are comparable to those of spontaneous labor, supporting a similar safety profile. IOL should therefore be offered when clinically indicated. The associated possibility of longer hospital stay should be included in patient counseling and healthcare facility planning.
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.