CHAMGAP
VERIFIEDPassed the Codex final verification and publication gate. Evidence-verification cutoff: 2026-08-07. AI was used for research and drafting; the existence of all 1 cited sources was verified at the original page, followed by blind grading, adversarial audit, and build validation. Methodology v1.0.
Verdict No. 2362 · Search date 2026-08-07 · Methodology v1.0

Planned induction at 39 weeks,
does it really help with Perinatal outcomes and cesarean delivery in low-risk nulliparous women?

30-Second Summary
B
Evidence Grade B · 76 · Safety caution
Planned induction at 39 weeks did not increase cesarean delivery and instead reduced it
Induction is a medical procedure requiring hospital assessment and maternal-fetal monitoring.
What the
research shows
The grade is B. ARRIVE randomized 6,106 low-risk nulliparous women to induction at 39 weeks 0-4 days or expectant management. The neonatal composite was not significant under the prespecified boundary, 4.3% versus 5.4%, RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.64-1.00), while cesarean delivery was lower, 18.6% versus 22.2%, RR 0.84 (0.76-0.93).
What the
ads claim
The result applies to low-risk, nulliparous women with a singleton cephalic pregnancy, not automatically to every term pregnancy.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Planned induction occurred at 39 weeks 0-4 days.
  • The expectant group could undergo indicated induction or cesarean delivery.
  • Outcome denominators were 3059 and 3037, slightly below randomized totals.
ID

Chamgap Semantic Classification Code

Candidate index · review held

UNK.planned-labor-induction-at.UNK.perinatal-outcomes-and-cesarean-delivery-in-low-risk-nulliparous-women.assess.UNK

Unknown > Planned labor induction at > Unknown > Perinatal outcomes and cesarean delivery in low-risk nulliparous women > Association or change assessment > Unknown

An automated migration candidate, not an issued permanent code; exact claim scope remains under review. This machine-generated migration candidate helps retrieval but is not a permanent assignment. The original verdict ID and URL remain authoritative.

Download semantic index (JSON) · Codebook v1

Gap Measurement · Verdict 2362 · B 76
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

The trial randomized 3062 versus 3044 women and analyzed outcomes in 3059 versus 3037. The source did not report an independent blinded event-adjudication committee, although it did use a separate blinded central review of relevant records. Component intervals were not adjusted for multiplicity. Neonatal intermediate or intensive care admission was 11.7% vs 13.0%, chorioamnionitis 13.3% vs 14.1%, postpartum hemorrhage 4.6% vs 4.5%, and maternal death was zero in both groups.

02

Why this is classified as B (76)

A large publicly funded randomized trial supports the cesarean result, but a single confirmatory trial limits the grade to B with 76 points.

Counterpoint. The primary neonatal composite failed, so severe neonatal improvement is not established.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — A large randomized trial showing lower cesarean delivery but a failed primary neonatal composite

Stored scoring profile
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

Stored derived and displayed grades match; this is not a current recalculation or validity check (B).

▦

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Lower cesarean deliveryBRates were significantly lower, 18.6% versus 22.2%.
Improved severe perinatal outcomeDRates were 4.3% versus 5.4%, but the prespecified significance boundary was not crossed.
✓

Cross-check — AI research and Codex final gate

AI was used for research and drafting. Blind grading, adversarial audit, and the methodology boundary rules were then reapplied before Codex performed the final evidence, grade, copy, and build checks. If a grade cannot be narrowed, both evidence positions and their reasons are published.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Grobman et al. 2018 ARRIVEMulticenter randomized trial6,106 randomized; outcomes analyzed in 6,096Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentPrimary perinatal death or severe neonatal complication composite; principal secondary cesarean deliveryComposite 4.3% vs 5.4%, RR 0.80 (0.64-1.00); cesarean 18.6% vs 22.2%, RR 0.84 (0.76-0.93)Large publicly funded hard-outcome RCT
§

Receipt — 1 References

All 1 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-07).

Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, et al. Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:513-523. PMID: 30089070. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1800566.
checked
Research and draft: AI used · Cross-check: blind grading and adversarial audit
Final verification and publication gate: Codex · Evidence date: 2026-08-07 · Corrections: none
↗

Cite this verdict

Planned induction at 39 weeks x perinatal outcomes and cesarean delivery Evidence Grade B card
[Chamgap] Planned induction at 39 weeks x perinatal outcomes and cesarean delivery — Evidence Grade B·76. 1 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/womens/induction-at-39-weeks-perinatal-cesarean/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.
↑