Nielsen 2005.

Methods	RCT
Participants	Number of women randomised: 226 Setting: Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington, USA Inclusion criteria GA at intervention: 39‐40 weeks Cephalic presentation Singleton gestation Maternal age of greater than 17 years Candidate for vaginal birth Semi‐favourable cervical Bishop score defined as a score of 5 or greater in nulliparous or 4 or greater in multiparous women Exclusion criteria No additional criteria reported State of cervix: favourable (≥ 5 for nulliparous and ≥ 4 for multiparous women)
Interventions	Induction group (n = 116): AROM, oxytocin or both versus Expectant management group (n = 110): weekly follow‐up until 42 weeks. Labour induced after 42 weeks. Weekly monitoring with CTG and ultrasound, increased to twice a week after 41 weeks.
Outcomes	Mother: randomisation to birth interval; admission to birth interval; Indication for admission; epidural analgesia; mode of birth; EBL; length of labour; chorioamnionitis; postpartum days Baby: birthweight; admission to NICU; Apgar score < 7 at 5 mins
Notes	The study was discontinued after recruitment of 226 women (target of 600) due to slow recruitment and no observed difference in the 2 groups Funding: not reported Declarations of interest: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	The randomisation sequence was generated using a computer‐generated list.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Allocation concealment was achieved using sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Blinding was not feasible.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Blinded outcome assessment was not mentioned.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No apparent losses to follow‐ up or exclusions. 23/116 (19.8%) in induction group went into spontaneous labour, 10/110 (9.1%) in the expectant management group required labour induction and results for these women were analysed according to which group they were randomised.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No access to trial protocol for confidently assess selective reporting. Perinatal death not reported.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Baseline imbalance for Bishop score "The only significant difference noted was EM patients had a more favorable Bishop score on admission than IND patients (7.2+2.1 versus 8.6+2.0, p<0.0001)."