ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2025
Planned Induction of Labour Versus Planned Caesarean Delivery in Women with Severe Pre-eclampsia at Term-a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study is to investigate whether planned caesarean delivery compared to planned induction of labour in women with severe pre-eclampsia at gestational age of more than 37 weeks of pregnancy will reduce maternal morbidity and/or perinatal morbidity. Method: This randomized controlled study was conducted from April 2021 to March 2022 at Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Midnapore Medical College, West Bengal. Data were analysed with respect to socio demographic status, clinical presentation, complications and their management. Result: One hundred and seventy-six women with severe pre-eclampsia were screened for eligibility, and 140 were included in the study. In 58.6% patients, the induction was successful. Type of delivery was successful in vaginal 37 (90.2%) and instrumental (ventouse and forceps) in four (19.8%) of the cases. In induction group, the most common reason for LSCS was MSL with foetal bradycardia. Foetal distress was seen in 22.90% of induction group, while absent in LSCS group. Conclusion: In our study, we found that there was no differences in the primary maternal outcome and the secondary maternal outcome between the two groups. The primary neonatal outcome was significantly poor in induction group, whereas good in LSCS group. So LSCS is better option in patients with severe pre-eclampsia at term. Key words-Severe Pre-eclampsia, Induction of labour.
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.