Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

27 questions · 27 findings · 4 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 12 · 44.4%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 7 · 25.9%Low 7 · 25.9%Moderate 1 · 3.7%High 0 · 0%

Oral mifepristone vs Foley catheter

Uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate changes · pregnant women, 40 weeks' gestation, single cephalic presentation, 1 previous low segment caesarean section

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Methods of term labour induction for women with a previous caesarean section 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Vaginal misoprostol vs intravenous (IV) oxytocin

Uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate changes · women with a previous caesarean section

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Methods of term labour induction for women with a previous caesarean section 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Amniotic membranes sweeping vs vaginal/intracervical prostaglandins

Uterine hyperstimulation with/without fetal heart rate (FHR) changes ‐ not reported · pregnant women carrying a live fetus at or near term (≥ 36 weeks' gestation).

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Membrane sweeping for induction of labour 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Amniotic membranes sweeping vs intravenous oxytocin/amniotomy

Uterine hyperstimulation with/without fetal heart rate (FHR) changes ‐ not reported · pregnant women carrying a live fetus at or near term (≥ 36 weeks' gestation).

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Membrane sweeping for induction of labour 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Amniotic membranes sweeping vs vaginal/oral misoprostol

Uterine hyperstimulation with/without fetal heart rate (FHR) changes ‐ not reported · pregnant women carrying a live fetus at or near term (≥ 36 weeks' gestation).

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Membrane sweeping for induction of labour 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

One frequency of amniotic membranes sweeping vs another frequency of amniotic membrane sweeping

Uterine hyperstimulation with/without fetal heart rate (FHR) changes ‐ not reported · pregnant women carrying a live fetus at or near term (≥ 36 weeks' gestation).

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Membrane sweeping for induction of labour 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Amniotic membranes sweeping vs no treatment/sham

Uterine hyperstimulation with/without fetal heart rate (FHR) changes ‐ not reported · pregnant women carrying a live fetus at or near term (≥ 36 weeks' gestation).

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Membrane sweeping for induction of labour 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found