Augensen 1987.

Study characteristics
Methods	RCT
Participants	Number of women randomised: 409 Setting: Bergen, Norway Study date: 1981‐84 (no further details) Inclusion criteria Healthy women Normal pregnancy Singleton Cephalic presentation Duration of pregnancy 290‐297 days from the first day of the LMP Reliable dates GA for intervention: 41+ weeks (290‐297 days) Primiparous (44%) and multiparous Exclusion criteria Use of contraceptive pills during the 2 months before the LMP State of cervix: mixed (about 35% in each group had unripe cervix)
Interventions	Induction group (n = 214): immediate induction with oxytocin (5 IU increased in a stepwise manner). GA at intervention 41+ weeks (290‐297 days) versus EM group (n = 195): NST every 3‐4 days, IOL after 7 days
Outcomes	Mother: caesarean section; assisted vaginal birth; length of labour; length of hospital stay Baby: perinatal death; birthweight; neonatal jaundice; meconium‐stained amniotic fluid; NICU admission
Notes	Funding: not reported Declarations of interest: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	List of random numbers
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Allocation concealment was unclear given that it was not undertaken by a staff member or team member clearly uninvolved in the trial. It was reported that the midwife undertook allocation using a random number list, and this list was inaccessible to the participating physicians.
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	4/214 in the IOL group went into labour before IOL but data for these women have been included in the IOL group for analyses. No apparent losses to follow‐up or exclusions.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	No outcomes were prespecified in the methods; some outcomes reported incompletely in text, e.g. "There was no significant difference between the groups in the use of analgesia, sedatives, and epidural anaesthesia".
Other bias	Low risk	Appears to be free of other bias.