{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,30]],"date-time":"2026-04-30T23:03:51Z","timestamp":1777590231511,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":3,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"7","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,1,11]],"date-time":"2011-01-11T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1294704000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":9141,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[1986,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>One hundred women for whom instrumental delivery had to be performed due to fetal asphyxia or uterine inertia were randomized to a vacuum extraction with the conventional Malmstr\u00f6m instrument or the Silastic cup of Kobayashi. With the Silastic cup, extraction time was shorter and injuries to the scalp were less common. On the other hand, extraction with the Silastic cup failed more often, especially in occiput posterior position. There were no differences in Apgar scores between the two groups.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3109\/00016348609161502","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2009,12,8]],"date-time":"2009-12-08T17:55:28Z","timestamp":1260294928000},"page":"791-792","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":25,"title":["Comparison Between the Conventional Malmstr\u00f6m Extractor and a New Extractor with Silastic Cup"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"65","author":[{"given":"M.","family":"Hammarstr\u00f6m","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"G.","family":"Csemiczky","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"P.","family":"Belfrage","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,1,11]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_1_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00006254-197510000-00001"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_3_1","first-page":"571","article-title":"Comparison of maternal and fetal effects of vacuum extraction with forceps or cesarean deliveries","volume":"57","author":"Greis J B.","year":"1981","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_4_1","first-page":"431","article-title":"Clinical assessment of the Kobayashi vacuum extractor","volume":"64","author":"Maryniak G M.","year":"1984","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"}],"container-title":["Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.3109%2F00016348609161502","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3109\/00016348609161502","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,21]],"date-time":"2023-10-21T23:53:57Z","timestamp":1697932437000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.3109\/00016348609161502"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[1986,1]]},"references-count":3,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[1986,1]]}},"alternative-id":["10.3109\/00016348609161502"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3109\/00016348609161502","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0001-6349","1600-0412"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0001-6349","type":"print"},{"value":"1600-0412","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[1986,1]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2011-01-11","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}