What do systematic reviews say?

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in vaginal birth within 24 hours compared with mechanical methods (low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.32 [0.98, 1.79]
  4 studies · 1044 participants
  Low

Oral misoprostol vs placebo/no treatment

It is very uncertain whether oral misoprostol changes uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate changes compared with placebo/no treatment (very low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 5.15 [0.25, 105.31]
  3 studies · 495 participants
  Very low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

Oral misoprostol may leads to lower caesarean section compared with mechanical methods (low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.84 [0.75, 0.95]
  6 studies · 2993 participants
  Low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate changes compared with mechanical methods (low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.31 [0.78, 2.21]
  4 studies · 2828 participants
  Low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

Oral misoprostol may leads to lower oxytocin augmentation compared with mechanical methods (low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.79 [0.65, 0.95]
  4 studies · 2708 participants
  Low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

It is very uncertain whether oral misoprostol changes uterine hyperstimulation without fetal heart rate changes compared with mechanical methods (very low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.64 [0.3, 1.38]
  3 studies · 2506 participants
  Very low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes compared with mechanical methods (low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.29 [0.69, 2.39]
  4 studies · 2707 participants
  Low

Oral misoprostol vs mechanical methods

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

• 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

Oral misoprostol probably leads to lower oxytocin augmentation compared with placebo/no treatment (moderate certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.46 [0.38, 0.55]
  3 studies · 495 participants
  Moderate

Oral misoprostol vs placebo/no treatment

It is very uncertain whether oral misoprostol changes uterine hyperstimulation without fetal heart rate changes compared with placebo/no treatment (very low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.06 [0.39, 10.87]
  2 studies · 430 participants
  Very low

Oral misoprostol vs placebo/no treatment

It is very uncertain whether oral misoprostol changes apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes compared with placebo/no treatment (very low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.11 [0.46, 2.66]
  3 studies · 495 participants
  Very low

Oral misoprostol vs placebo/no treatment

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

Oral misoprostol vs vaginal dinoprostone

Oral misoprostol showed no clear difference in vaginal birth within 24 hours compared with vaginal dinoprostone (low certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.93 [0.87, 1]
  10 studies · 8983 participants
  Low

Oral misoprostol vs vaginal dinoprostone

Oral misoprostol probably leads to lower caesarean section compared with vaginal dinoprostone (moderate certainty).

• Low‐dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.84 [0.78, 0.9]
  13 studies · 9676 participants
  Moderate

Oral betamimetic vs placebo

Oral betamimetic may leads to lower preterm labour compared with placebo (low certainty).

• Prophylactic oral betamimetics for reducing preterm birth in women with a twin pregnancy 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.37 [0.17, 0.78]
  2 studies · 194 participants
  Low

Oral betamimetic vs placebo

Oral betamimetic showed no clear difference in prelabour rupture of membranes compared with placebo (low certainty).

• Prophylactic oral betamimetics for reducing preterm birth in women with a twin pregnancy 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.42 [0.42, 4.82]
  1 study · 144 participants
  Low

Oral betamimetic vs placebo

Oral betamimetic showed no clear difference in preterm birth (less than 37 weeks' gestation) compared with placebo (low certainty).

• Prophylactic oral betamimetics for reducing preterm birth in women with a twin pregnancy 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.85 [0.65, 1.1]
  4 studies · 276 participants
  Low

Oral betamimetic vs placebo

Oral betamimetic showed no clear difference in very preterm birth (less than 34 weeks' gestation) compared with placebo (low certainty).

• Prophylactic oral betamimetics for reducing preterm birth in women with a twin pregnancy 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.47 [0.15, 1.5]
  1 study · 144 participants
  Low

Any ICS plus oral corticosteroid vs oral corticosteroid

Any ICS plus oral corticosteroid showed no clear difference in asthma relapse1at 20 to 24 days compared with oral corticosteroid (high certainty).

• Inhaled steroids for acute asthma following emergency department discharge 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.68 [0.46, 1.02]
  3 studies · 909 participants
  High

Any ICS plus oral corticosteroid vs oral corticosteroid

Any ICS plus oral corticosteroid showed no clear difference in hospital admission compared with oral corticosteroid (moderate certainty).

• Inhaled steroids for acute asthma following emergency department discharge 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.99 [0.39, 2.52]
  2 studies · 805 participants
  Moderate