ArticleBMJ open2022
Delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women with gestational diabetes undergoing epidural labour analgesia: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping global research on labor and postpartum pain management: a bibliometric analysis (2000-2025).International journal for equity in health · 2026Review
- Effect of Initial Glucose Tolerance Test Response on Pregnancy Outcomes in Type A1 Gestational Diabetes.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to retrospectively analyse the influence of epidural labour analgesia (ELA) on delivery and maternal and neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) using propensity score-matched analysis.
designRetrospective cohort analysis.
settingPrimary care practices in a teaching hospital from March 2018 to October 2021.
participantsA total of 816 delivery records of nulliparous women with GDM were collected and retrospectively analysed.
interventionsELA and non-ELA (NELA) cohorts were assessed.
main outcome measureThe primary outcome assessed was delivery type (spontaneous, assisted vaginal or caesarean). The secondary outcomes assessed included labour duration and maternal and neonatal outcomes.
resultsA total of 137 propensity score-matched pairs of ELA and NELA patients were analysed. ELA was associated with a decreased rate of caesarean section (18.3% vs 46.0% in the ELA vs NELA cohort, respectively; p<0.05) and an increased occurrence of assisted vaginal delivery (35.8% vs 12.4% in the ELA vs NELA cohort, respectively; p<0.05). The duration of the first and total stages of labour was prolonged, the occurrence of postpartum fever increased, and the duration of hospital stay was shortened in those receiving ELA (all p<0.05). Additionally, neonatal birth weight, plasma glucose levels and neonatal macrosomia occurrence increased, while neonatal intensive care unit admissions and neonatal hypoglycaemia decreased in the ELA versus the NELA group (all p<0.05). With respect to other maternal and neonatal outcomes, both cohorts were similar.
conclusionsThe use of ELA decreases the rate of caesarean section and improves maternal and neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women with GDM. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-2000033091.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.