Maternal and perinatal outcomes of failed prostaglandin induction of labour: A retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Induction of labor is performed in up to 25% of pregnant women. When the cervix is unfavorable, cervical ripening may be safely and effectively performed using slow-release vaginal inserts of prostaglandin E2. However, the risk factors, management, and outcome of patients who fail to respond remain unclear. Objective To evaluate the outcomes of women who fail to respond to cervical ripening with prostaglandins. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis (2013–2019) was conducted. Women with a singleton gestation who underwent induction of labor due to post-date pregnancy using a slow-release prostaglandin E2 vaginal insert for cervical ripening were included. Data on clinical and outcome factors were derived from the medical files, and findings were compared between patients who achieved ripening within 24 h of treatment onset and those who did not. The primary outcome measure was the vaginal delivery rate following the ripening process. Secondary outcome measures were adverse composite maternal and neonatal outcomes. A model combining maternal characteristics and response rates to ripening was constructed. Results The final cohort included 1285 women: 1202 responded to cervical ripening (93.54%) and 83 (6.46%) did not. Compared to non-responders, responders had higher rates of vaginal delivery (96.51% vs. 66.27%, P < 0.001); lower rates of adverse maternal composite outcome (12.81% vs. 24.10%, P = 0.031) and adverse neonatal composite respiratory outcome (1.33% vs. 6.02%, P = 0.009). Responders were younger than non-responders (mean 30.03 years vs 31.73 years, P = 0.005) and had a lower nulliparity rate (50.99% vs 76.92%, P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, failure to achieve cervical ripening was an independent risk factor for intrapartum cesarean delivery due to prolonged labor (aOR 11.90, 95% CI 6.13–23.25). Conclusion Women who achieve cervical ripening with prostaglandin E2 vaginal inserts are younger and more often multiparous than women who fail to respond. Good response to the cervical ripening process is associated with lower rates of intrapartum cesarean delivery and of adverse outcomes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".