Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

7 questions · 7 findings · 2 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 42.9%Low 3 · 42.9%Moderate 1 · 14.3%High 0 · 0%

Oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · women in the third trimester for induction of labour.

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in admission to neonatal intensive care unitÂ compared with vaginal misoprostol (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.03 [0.86, 1.23]
23 studies · 4450 participants
Moderate

Oral misoprostol one‐ to two‐hourly vs oral misoprostol four‐ to six‐hourly

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · women in the third trimester for induction of labour with intact membranes

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 64 participants
Very low

Oral misoprostol vs vaginal dinoprostone

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · women in the third trimester for induction of labour.

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in admission to neonatal intensive care unitÂ compared with vaginal dinoprostone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.8 [0.6, 1.07]
11 studies · 9278 participants
Low

Oral misoprostol vs intravenous (IV) oxytocin

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · women in the third trimester for induction of labour.

It is very uncertain whether oral misoprostol changes admission to neonatal intensive care unit compared with intravenous oxytocin (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.65 [0.12, 3.45]
4 studies · 517 participants
Very low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · women in the third trimester for induction of labour.

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in admission to neonatal intensive care unit compared with mechanical methods (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.24 [0.87, 1.76]
5 studies · 2886 participants
Low

Oral misoprostol vs placebo/no treatment

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · women with ruptured membranes in the third trimester for induction of labour.

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 130 participants
Very low

Balloon (Foley or ATAD) vs low‐dose oral misoprostol

Admission to neonatal intensive care unit · third trimester induction of labour in women with a viable fetus

Balloon (Foley or ATAD) showed no clear difference in neonatal intensive care unit admission compared with low‐dose oral misoprostol (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mechanical methods for induction of labour 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.82 [0.58, 1.17]
5 studies · 2873 participants
Low