473 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24631440)
41. Immediate neonatal outcomes after elective induction of labor.
Beebe L; Beaty C; Rayburn W
J Reprod Med; 2007 Mar; 52(3):173-5. PubMed ID: 17465284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Elective induction of labor: failure to follow guidelines and risk of cesarean delivery.
Le Ray C; Carayol M; Bréart G; Goffinet F;
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2007; 86(6):657-65. PubMed ID: 17520395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Maternal and neonatal morbidity among nulliparous women undergoing elective induction of labor.
Vardo JH; Thornburg LL; Glantz JC
J Reprod Med; 2011; 56(1-2):25-30. PubMed ID: 21366123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. [INDUCTION OF LABOR AT 39 WEEKS OF GESTATION VERSUS EXPECTANT MANAGEMENT].
Sgayer I; Frank Wolf M
Harefuah; 2019 Dec; 158(12):802-806. PubMed ID: 31823535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Is gestational age at term a risk factor for ongoing pregnancies in nulliparous women: A prospective cohort study.
Quibel T; Rozenberg P; Duvillier C; Bouyer C; Bouyer J
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM; 2023 Feb; 5(2):100808. PubMed ID: 36371036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Prolonged and post-term pregnancies: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF).
Vayssière C; Haumonte JB; Chantry A; Coatleven F; Debord MP; Gomez C; Le Ray C; Lopez E; Salomon LJ; Senat MV; Sentilhes L; Serry A; Winer N; Grandjean H; Verspyck E; Subtil D;
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2013 Jul; 169(1):10-6. PubMed ID: 23434325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Practice variations between family physicians and obstetricians in the management of low-risk pregnancies.
Hueston WJ; Applegate JA; Mansfield CJ; King DE; McClaflin RR
J Fam Pract; 1995 Apr; 40(4):345-51. PubMed ID: 7699347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Elective Induction of Labor or Expectant Management: Outcomes Among Nulliparous Women with Uncomplicated Pregnancies.
Lewis S; Zhao Z; Schorn M
J Midwifery Womens Health; 2022 Mar; 67(2):170-177. PubMed ID: 35107213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Risk factors for cesarean delivery in preterm, term and post-term patients undergoing induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix.
Ennen CS; Bofill JA; Magann EF; Bass JD; Chauhan SP; Morrison JC
Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2009; 67(2):113-7. PubMed ID: 18971583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Elective induction compared with expectant management in nulliparous women with a favorable cervix.
Osmundson SS; Ou-Yang RJ; Grobman WA
Obstet Gynecol; 2010 Sep; 116(3):601-605. PubMed ID: 20733441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Delivery for women with a previous cesarean: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF).
Sentilhes L; Vayssière C; Beucher G; Deneux-Tharaux C; Deruelle P; Diemunsch P; Gallot D; Haumonté JB; Heimann S; Kayem G; Lopez E; Parant O; Schmitz T; Sellier Y; Rozenberg P; d'Ercole C
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2013 Sep; 170(1):25-32. PubMed ID: 23810846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Elective induction compared with expectant management in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix.
Osmundson S; Ou-Yang RJ; Grobman WA
Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Mar; 117(3):583-587. PubMed ID: 21343761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. The impact of fetal growth restriction on latency in the setting of expectant management of preeclampsia.
McKinney D; Boyd H; Langager A; Oswald M; Pfister A; Warshak CR
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Mar; 214(3):395.e1-7. PubMed ID: 26767794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Influence of the mode of delivery on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a comparison between elective cesarean section and planned vaginal delivery in a low-risk obstetric population.
Bodner K; Wierrani F; Grünberger W; Bodner-Adler B
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2011 Jun; 283(6):1193-8. PubMed ID: 20505947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Outcomes of elective labour induction and elective caesarean section in low-risk pregnancies between 37 and 41 weeks' gestation.
Dunne C; Da Silva O; Schmidt G; Natale R
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2009 Dec; 31(12):1124-30. PubMed ID: 20085677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Comparison of elective induction of labor with favorable Bishop scores versus expectant management: a randomized clinical trial.
Nielsen PE; Howard BC; Hill CC; Larson PL; Holland RH; Smith PN
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2005 Jul; 18(1):59-64. PubMed ID: 16105793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Timing of cesarean delivery in women with ≥2 previous cesarean deliveries.
Shinar S; Walsh L; Roberts N; Melamed N; Barrett J; Riddell C; Berger H
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Jan; 226(1):110.e1-110.e10. PubMed ID: 34363783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Timing of elective cesarean delivery at term and its impact on maternal and neonatal outcomes among Thai and other Southeast Asian pregnant women.
Phaloprakarn C; Tangjitgamol S; Manusirivithaya S
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2016 Aug; 42(8):936-43. PubMed ID: 27079277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. When has an induction failed?
Simon CE; Grobman WA
Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Apr; 105(4):705-9. PubMed ID: 15802394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after induction of labor without an identified indication.
Dublin S; Lydon-Rochelle M; Kaplan RC; Watts DH; Critchlow CW
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2000 Oct; 183(4):986-94. PubMed ID: 11035351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
