{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,1]],"date-time":"2026-07-01T01:34:28Z","timestamp":1782869668315,"version":"3.54.5"},"reference-count":36,"publisher":"Elsevier BV","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,11,1]],"date-time":"2018-11-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1541030400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/tdm\/userlicense\/1.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,11,1]],"date-time":"2018-11-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1541030400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/legal\/tdmrep-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["clinicalkey.com","clinicalkey.com.au","elsevier.com","sciencedirect.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Midwifery"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,11]]},"DOI":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2018,8,10]],"date-time":"2018-08-10T22:50:38Z","timestamp":1533941438000},"page":"111-118","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/elsevier_cm_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":17,"special_numbering":"C","title":["Timing induction of labour at 41 or 42 weeks? A closer look at time frames of comparison: A review"],"prefix":"10.1016","volume":"66","author":[{"given":"Judit K.J.","family":"Keulen","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Aafke","family":"Bruinsma","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joep C.","family":"Kortekaas","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jeroen","family":"van Dillen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joris A.M.","family":"van\u00a0der\u00a0Post","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Esteriek","family":"de Miranda","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"78","reference":[{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0001","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"390","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000452744.06088.48","article-title":"Practice bulletin no. 146: management of late-term and postterm pregnancies","volume":"124","year":"2014","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0003","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"12","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-2753.2010.01516.x","article-title":"Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: acomparison of the cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool and the effective public health practice project quality assessment tool: methodological research","volume":"18","author":"Armijo-Olivo","year":"2010","journal-title":"J. Eval. Clin. Pract."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0004","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1192","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.294.6581.1192","article-title":"Randomised comparison of early versus late induction of labour in post-term pregnancy","volume":"294","author":"Augensen","year":"1987","journal-title":"Br. Med. J. (Clin. Res. Ed.)"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0005","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"683","DOI":"10.3109\/00016348909006139","article-title":"Comparison of induced versus non-induced labor in post-term pregnancy. A randomized prospective study","volume":"68","author":"Bergsjo","year":"1989","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0006","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1042","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.12447","article-title":"A randomized controlled trial on early induction compared to expectant management of nulliparous women with prolonged latent phases","volume":"93","author":"Brane","year":"2014","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0007","first-page":"218","article-title":"A randomized trial on induction of labor","volume":"4","author":"Breart","year":"1982","journal-title":"Dev. Pharmacol. Therap."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0008","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Chakravarti, S., Goenka, B. 2000. Conservative policy of induction of labor in uncomplicated postdated pregnancies. XVI FIGO World Congress of Obstetrics \u2026 Gynecology; Sept 3\u20138; Washington DC, USA (Book 3). 2000: page 62.","DOI":"10.1016\/S0020-7292(00)80498-1"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0009","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"154","DOI":"10.1016\/S0301-2115(02)00243-9","article-title":"Postterm with favorable cervix: is induction necessary?","volume":"106","author":"Chanrachakul","year":"2003","journal-title":"Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0010","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"767","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(75)92435-6","article-title":"Elective induction of labour. A randomised prospective trial","volume":"1","author":"Cole","year":"1975","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0084","unstructured":"Cohn, M., Rogers, M. 1992. Post maturity; a randomised study in a Hong Kong population. Proceedings of the 26th British Congress of Obstetrics and Gynaecology; July 7-10; Manchester, UK. 1992:306."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"928","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(87)90359-0","article-title":"Management of prolonged pregnancy: induction of labor versus antepartum fetal testing","volume":"156","author":"Dyson","year":"1987","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0012","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"6","DOI":"10.1159\/000293605","article-title":"Is induction of labor indicated in prolonged pregnancy? Results of a prospective randomised trial","volume":"27","author":"Egarter","year":"1989","journal-title":"Gynecol. Obstet. Invest."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0013","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"164","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2004.08.013","article-title":"Induction of labor with three different techniques at 41 weeks of gestation or spontaneous follow-up until 42 weeks in women with definitely unfavorable cervical scores","volume":"120","author":"Gelisen","year":"2005","journal-title":"Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0081","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Gulmezoglu, A.M., Crowther, C.A., Middleton, P., Heatley, E. 2012. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (6), CD004945.","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD004945.pub3"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0014","series-title":"Induction of Labour","year":"2008"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0015","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1587","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM199206113262402","article-title":"Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. The Canadian multicenter post-term pregnancy trial group","volume":"326","author":"Hannah","year":"1992","journal-title":"N. Engl. J. Med."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0080","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Heimstad, R., Skogvoll, E., Mattsson, L.A., Johansen, O.J., Eik-Nes, S.H., Salvesen, K.A. 2007. Induction of labor or serial antenatal fetal monitoring in postterm pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 109 (3), 609\u201317.","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000255665.77009.94"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0016","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"247","DOI":"10.1080\/00016340701743165","article-title":"Induction of labour for post-term pregnancy and risk estimates for intrauterine and perinatal death","volume":"87","author":"Heimstad","year":"2008","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0017","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"795","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1969.tb06180.x","article-title":"A controlled trial of surgical induction of labour and amnioscopy in the management of prolonged pregnancy","volume":"76","author":"Henry","year":"1969","journal-title":"J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Br. Commonw."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0018","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"253","DOI":"10.1016\/0020-7292(92)90325-D","article-title":"Prolonged pregnancy: the management dilemma","volume":"37","author":"Herabutya","year":"1992","journal-title":"Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0019","first-page":"270","article-title":"Management of prolonged pregnancy: a randomized trial of induction of labour and antepartum foetal monitoring","volume":"14","author":"James","year":"2001","journal-title":"Natl. Med. J. India"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0020","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"350","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2393-14-350","article-title":"Effects of induction of labour versus expectant management in women with impending post-term pregnancies: the 41 week \u2013 42 week dilemma","volume":"14","author":"Kortekaas","year":"2014","journal-title":"BMC Preg. Childbirth"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0021","first-page":"101","article-title":"Gestacion prolongada: pautas de actuacion","volume":"40","author":"Ocon","year":"1997","journal-title":"Progresos de Obstetricia y Ginecologia"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0022","first-page":"105","article-title":"Alternative approaches to the management of gravidas with prolonged-postterm-postdate pregnancies","volume":"30 (4)","author":"Martin","year":"1989","journal-title":"J. Miss. State Med. Assoc."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0023","article-title":"Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term","volume":"5","author":"Middleton","year":"2018","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst. Rev."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0024","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1258","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000001154","article-title":"Elective Induction of Labor Compared With Expectant Management of Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation: A Randomized Controlled Trial","volume":"126","author":"Miller","year":"2015","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0025","series-title":"Clinical Guideline 70.","article-title":"Inducing labour","year":"2008"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0026","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"716","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(94)70269-1","article-title":"A clinical trial of induction of labor versus expectant management in postterm pregnancy. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Network of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units","volume":"170","year":"1994","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0027","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"59","DOI":"10.1080\/14767050500139604","article-title":"Comparison of elective induction of labor with favorable Bishop scores versus expectant management: a randomized clinical trial'","volume":"18","author":"Nielsen","year":"2005","journal-title":"J. Matern. Fetal. Neonatal. Med."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0028","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"19","DOI":"10.1016\/S0020-7292(97)00179-3","article-title":"Pregnancy outcome beyond 41 weeks gestation","volume":"59","author":"Roach","year":"1997","journal-title":"Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0029","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"454","DOI":"10.1016\/S0368-2315(05)82853-4","article-title":"[Management of pregnancies beyond forty-one week's gestation with an unfavorable cervix]","volume":"34","author":"Sahraoui","year":"2005","journal-title":"J. Gynecol. Obstet. Biol. Reprod. (Paris)"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0030","first-page":"58","article-title":"Prolonged pregnancy: induction or observation","volume":"116","author":"Suikkari","year":"1983","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. et Gynecol. Scand. Supplement"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0031","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"813","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1509117","article-title":"Randomized trial of labor induction in women 35 years of age or older","volume":"374","author":"Walker","year":"2016","journal-title":"N. Engl. J. Med."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0032","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"6","DOI":"10.1080\/00016340802555948","article-title":"Induction of labor versus expectant management for post-date pregnancy: is there sufficient evidence for a change in clinical practice?","volume":"88","author":"Wennerholm","year":"2009","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0033","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"206","DOI":"10.1055\/s-2007-999774","article-title":"A randomized trial of induction at 42 weeks gestation versus expectant management for postdates pregnancies","volume":"4","author":"Witter","year":"1987","journal-title":"Am. J. Perinatol."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011_bib0082","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Jozwiak, M., Oude Rengerink, K., Benthem, M., van Beek, E., Dijksterhuis, M.G., de Graaf, I.M., et al. 2011. Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term (PROBAAT trial): an openlabel,\nrandomised controlled trial. Lancet. 378 (9809), 209\u2013103.","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(11)61484-0"}],"container-title":["Midwifery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0266613818302249?httpAccept=text\/xml","content-type":"text\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0266613818302249?httpAccept=text\/plain","content-type":"text\/plain","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,2]],"date-time":"2025-10-02T15:55:22Z","timestamp":1759420522000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/linkinghub.elsevier.com\/retrieve\/pii\/S0266613818302249"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2018,11]]},"references-count":36,"alternative-id":["S0266613818302249"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011","relation":{},"ISSN":["0266-6138"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0266-6138","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2018,11]]},"assertion":[{"value":"Elsevier","name":"publisher","label":"This article is maintained by"},{"value":"Timing induction of labour at 41 or 42 weeks? A closer look at time frames of comparison: A review","name":"articletitle","label":"Article Title"},{"value":"Midwifery","name":"journaltitle","label":"Journal Title"},{"value":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.midw.2018.07.011","name":"articlelink","label":"CrossRef DOI link to publisher maintained version"},{"value":"article","name":"content_type","label":"Content Type"},{"value":"\u00a9 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.","name":"copyright","label":"Copyright"}]}}