Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

23 questions · 23 findings · 12 reviews · Headline outcomes only

No studies found 1 · 4.3%GRADE not reported 1 · 4.3%Very low 4 · 17.4%Low 7 · 30.4%Moderate 6 · 26.1%High 4 · 17.4%

Admission cardiotocography vs intermittent auscultation

Rate of caesarean section · Low risk pregnant women. All of the women were in labour.

Admission cardiotocography showed no clear difference in incidence of caesarean section compared with intermittent auscultation (low‐risk women) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Caesarean section ‐ low risk group · nurses, midwives, physicians

The intervention showed no clear difference in caesarean section ‐ low risk group (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Foley catheter vs intravenous (IV) oxytocin

Caesarean section · pregnant women with a previous low transverse caesarean section, singleton live pregnancy with cephalic presentation, period of gestation…

Foley catheter showed no clear difference in caesarean section compared with intravenous (IV) oxytocin (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Vaginal isosorbide mononitrate vs Foley catheter

Caesarean section · pregnant women with 1 previous lower segment caesarean section at 37 weeks and beyond, with a BS of ≤ 6, intact membranes, reactive…

It is very uncertain whether vaginal isosorbide mononitrate changes caesarean section compared with foley catheter (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Vaginal PGE2 vs intravenous (IV) oxytocin

Caesarean section · women with one previous lower segment caesarean section and requiring labour induction due to prolonged pregnancy or pre‐eclampsia,…

Vaginal PGE2 showed no clear difference in caesarean section compared with intravenous (IV) oxytocin (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Caesarean section · women in late pregnancy (after 24 weeks' gestation) in both unselected populations and designated low‐risk populations

The intervention showed no clear difference in caesarean section (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Caesarean section · women in the third trimester for induction of labour with intact membranes

It is very uncertain whether oral misoprostol one‐ to two‐hourly changes caesarean section compared with oral misoprostol four‐ to six‐hourly (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review