ArticleAJOG global reports2024
Preferences for induction of labor methods in India: a qualitative study of views and experiences of women, clinicians, and researchers.
Article in AJOG global reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03749902 (A Randomized Trial Comparing Oral Misoprostol Alone with Oral Misoprostol Followed by Oxytocin in Women Induced for Hypertension of Pregnancy), which is not on this 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.
A Randomized Trial Comparing Oral Misoprostol Alone with Oral Misoprostol Followed by Oxytocin in Women Induced for Hypertension of Pregnancy
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating women's experiences and satisfaction with labour induction in India: a comparison of the participant generated experience and satisfaction (PaGES) index with standard methods.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Trial
- Nulliparous Women's Experience in the Immediate Postpartum Period After Cervical Ripening According to the Method: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Induction of labor (IOL) is an increasingly common intervention, but experiences and preferences of induction methods are under-researched particularly in low -and middle-income countries. Understanding these perspectives is important to improve the childbirth experience. Objective: To explore the experiences and preferences of IOL methods for women, clinicians, and researchers in the "Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction" (MOLI) study. Study Design: This qualitative study was based in two government hospitals in the city of Nagpur, India-one tertiary referral hospital and one women's hospital. Fifty-three semi-structured interviews with women before and after induction (between days 1 and 5 postnatal), with women recruited to the "Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction (MOLI)" randomized controlled trial (NCT03749902). Eight focus group discussions with doctors, nurses, and trial research assistants before and during trial delivery were conducted. Thematic analysis was conducted using the Framework approach. Results: Four themes emerged: (1) Conclusion: Women did not have a strong preference for the IOL method and viewed childbirth positively when maternal and neonatal outcomes were good. Labor pain, vaginal examinations, a normal birth, and interactions with staff impacted women's experiences.
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.