The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: A meta-analysis
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze published randomized trials assessing the safety and efficacy of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. DATA SOURCES: We supplemented a search of entries in electronic data bases with references cited in original studies and review articles to identify randomized trials of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Two blinded investigators performed independent trial quality evaluation and data abstraction of randomized clinical trials assessing the efficacy of misoprostol as a cervical ripening and labor-inducing agent. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We calculated an estimate of the odds ratio (OR) and risk difference for dichotomous outcomes, using both a random- and fixed-effects model. Continuous outcomes were pooled using a variance-weighted average of the within-study difference in means. Of 16 studies identified, eight met our criteria for meta-analysis. These eight trials included 966 patients (488 received misoprostol and 478 were controls). Women who received misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction had a significantly lower overall cesarean rate (OR 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48, 0.93) and a higher incidence of vaginal delivery within 24 hours of misoprostol application (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.87, 3.71). Use of misoprostol was associated with a higher incidence of tachysystole (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.80, 4.04) but not hyperstimulation (OR 1.91, 95% CI 0.98, 3.73). The incidences of abnormal 5-minute Apgar scores and admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit were similar in the misoprostol and control groups. The pooled estimate of the mean interval from start of induction to delivery was 4.6 hours fewer (95% CI -3.5, -5.7) in the misoprostol group. CONCLUSION: Published data confirm the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol as an agent for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data From Retrospective Studies of Disease
(1959) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/22.4.719 · Cited by 14,689
Moher, D., Jadad, A. R., Nichol, G., Penman, M., Tugwell, P., & Walsh, S. (1995) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(94)00031-w · Cited by 1,308
Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis
Detsky, A. S., Naylor, C. D., O'Rourke, K., McGeer, A. J., & L'Abbé, K. A. (1992) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(92)90085-2 · Cited by 640
Cited by
Goldberg, A. B., Greenberg, M. B., & Darney, P. D. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200101043440107 · Cited by 450
Woodward, D. F., Jones, R. L., & Narumiya, S. (2011) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.110.003517 · Cited by 443
Metadata
- Authors
- SANCHEZRAMOS, L., KAUNITZ, A., WEARS, R., DELKE, I., & GAUDIER, F.
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 1997-04
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 633-642
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2152931082
- Cited by
- 243
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 19.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: A meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0029-7844(96)00374-2
- The paper
- SANCHEZRAMOS, L., KAUNITZ, A., WEARS, R., DELKE, I., & GAUDIER, F. (1997). Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: A meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(96)00374-2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.