SynthesisBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2025
Outpatient or Inpatient Setting for Cervical Ripening Before Induction of Labour: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outpatient cervical ripening with Foley balloon or mifepristone: Insights into the time taken to reach the active phase of labor.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Trial
- Article
- Data-sharing and trustworthiness of trials evaluating cervical ripening in induction of labour: a meta-epidemiological study of randomised controlled trials.EClinicalMedicine · 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
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal methods and settings for induction of labour (IOL) in terms of effectiveness, safety, and women's experience are still not elucidated.
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of outpatient versus inpatient cervical ripening settings for IOL. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Cochrane Library, WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to July 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, viable singleton gestation, no language restrictions, all the published and unpublished data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: An individual participant data meta-analysis. MAIN
resultsEleven out of 18 (61.1%) eligible RCTs shared IPD, totalling 2593 pregnant individuals undergoing IOL (62.2% of all participants in the published RCTs). Among the shared RCTs, four used balloon catheters alone in both groups. Three RCTs compared outpatient balloon catheter with inpatient balloon catheter plus oxytocin. Another three RCTs compared outpatient balloon catheter to inpatient vaginal dinoprostone. One RCT used Dilapan-S in both groups. No trials evaluating outpatient use of vaginal prostaglandins were identified. Vaginal birth (11 RCTs, 2584 women, 67.8% vs. 70.2%, aOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70; 1.30), composite perinatal outcome (9 RCTs, 2525 women, 11.1% vs. 11.7%, aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75; 1.16) and composite maternal (10 RCTs, 2480 women, 14.3% vs. 15.4%, aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.65; 1.20) outcome did not differ between outpatient and inpatient groups. The outpatient group had a lower risk of acidosis, more epidural analgesia, and more oxytocin. There were no perinatal deaths in either group.
conclusionsOverall effectiveness, perinatal and maternal safety are comparable between outpatient setting cervical ripening with a mechanical method and inpatient with any method.
trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42022313183.
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.