MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239106624 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003246

Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour

2001· review· en· W4239106624 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony J Kelly, Brenda P Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOxytocinPlaceboMisoprostolChildbirthLabor inductionObstetricsRipeningPregnancyAbortionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oxytocin is the commonest induction agent used worldwide. It has been used alone, in combination with amniotomy or following cervical ripening with other pharmacological or non-pharmacological methods. Prior to the introduction of prostaglandin agents oxytocin was used as a cervical ripening agent as well. In developed countries oxytocin alone is more commonly used in the presence of ruptured membranes whether spontaneous or artificial. In developing countries where the incidence of HIV is high, delaying amniotomy in labour reduces vertical transmission rates and hence the use of oxytocin with intact membranes warrants further investigation. This review will address the use of oxytocin alone for induction of labour. Amniotomy alone or oxytocin with amniotomy for induction of labour has been reviewed elsewhere in the Cochrane Library. Trials which consider concomitant administration of oxytocin and amniotomy will not be considered. This is one of a series of reviews of methods of cervical ripening and labour induction using a standardised methodology. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of oxytocin alone for third trimester cervical ripening or induction of labour in comparison with other methods of induction of labour or placebo/no treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and bibliographies of relevant papers. Last searched: May 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: The criteria for inclusion included the following: (1) clinical trials comparing vaginal prostaglandins used for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction with placebo/no treatment or other methods listed above it on a predefined list of labour induction methods; (2) random allocation to the treatment or control group; (3) adequate allocation concealment; (4) violations of allocated management not sufficient to materially affect conclusions; (5) clinically meaningful outcome measures reported; (6) data available for analysis according to the random allocation; (7) missing data insufficient to materially affect the conclusions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A strategy was developed to deal with the large volume and complexity of trial data relating to labour induction. This involved a two-stage method of data extraction. The initial data extraction was done centrally, and incorporated into a series of primary reviews arranged by methods of induction of labour, following a standardised methodology. The data is to be extracted from the primary reviews into a series of secondary reviews, arranged by category of woman. MAIN RESULTS: In total, 110 trials were considered; 52 have been excluded and 58 included examining a total of 11,129 women. Comparing oxytocin alone with expectant management: Oxytocin alone reduced the rate of unsuccessful vaginal delivery within 24 hours when compared with expectant management (8.3% versus 54%, relative risk (RR) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10,0.25) but the caesarean section rate was increased (10.4% versus 8.9%, RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.01,1.36). This increase in caesarean section rate was not apparent in the subgroup analyses. Women were less likely to be unsatisfied with induction rather than expectant management, in the one trial reporting this outcome (5.5% versus 13.7%, RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33, 0.56). Comparing oxytocin alone with vaginal prostaglandins: Oxytocin alone was associated with an increase in unsuccessful vaginal delivery within 24 hours (52% versus 28%, RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.41, 2.43), irrespective of membrane status, but there was no difference in caesarean section rates (11.4% versus 10%, RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95, 1.33). Comparing oxytocin alone with intracervical prostaglandins: Oxytocin alone was associated with an increase in unsuccessful vaginal delivery within 24 hours when compared with intracervical PGE2 (51% versus 35%, RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.12,1.99). For all women with an unfavourable cervix regardless of membrane status, the caesarean section rates were increased (19.0% versus 13.1%, RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11, 1.82). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Overall, comparison of oxytocin alone with either intravaginal or intracervical PGE2 reveals that the prostaglandin agents probably overall have more benefits than oxytocin alone. The amount of information relating to specific clinical subgroups is limited, especially with respect to women with intact membranes. Comparison of oxytocin alone to vaginal PGE2 in women with ruptured membranes reveals that both interventions are probably equally efficacious with each having some advantages and disadvantages over the others. With respect to current practice in women with ruptured membranes induction can be recommended by either method and in women with intact membranes there is insufficient information to make firm recommendations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.156
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207