ArticleScientific reports2026
Induction of labour versus expectant management after one previous caesarean birth maternal and neonatal outcomes in a population-based cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
To investigate maternal and neonatal outcomes after induction of labour (IOL), across all indications, compared with expectant management at term among women with prior caesarean section (CS). Women with one prior CS planned for vaginal birth 2007-2020 (N = 38 689). IOL was investigated as a continuum in days and compared with expectant management (EM; onset of birth one day or more later). The risk of severe and moderate maternal and neonatal outcomes at gestational week 37-42 was compared between IOL and EM using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results are presented as adjusted absolute risks, relative risks, and adjusted risk differences (aRD), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). IOL compared to EM increased the risk of CS with the maximum at 40 weeks (aRD 5.5%, 95% CI 3.0;6.6). The risk of severe maternal and neonatal outcomes increased with gestational age (p < 0.001), without difference between IOL and EM. Moderate severe neonatal outcomes were increased at week 37 (aRD 3.8, 95% CI 1.4;7.4) but reduced with IOL at week 39 (aRD - 1.0, 95% CI -1.6;-0.3). For women with prior CS, IOL at weeks 39-41 was associated with unplanned CS. Timing of birth influence neonatal 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.