Egarter 1989.

Study characteristics
Methods	RCT
Participants	Number of women randomised: 345 Setting: Vienna, Austria Study date: not reported Inclusion criteria Length of pregnancy established by early ultrasound Membranes intact Cervix favourable for induction (modified Bishop score of > 4) GA at intervention: 40 completed weeks ("at due date") Approximately half the women were primiparous Exclusion criteria Any fetal or maternal risk factors based on history, gynaecological/obstetrical investigation, CTG and routine lab results State of cervix: favourable (Modified Bishop score > 4)
Interventions	Induction group (n = 180): vaginal PE2 (3 mg) tablets repeated 6 and 24 hours later if no active labour versus EM group (n = 165): spontaneous labour awaited until 42 weeks. NST monitoring every 2‐3 days
Outcomes	Mother: birth interval (onset of contractions to birth in hours); rate and indication for operative birth; length of labour; analgesia requirements; caesarean section Baby: birthweight; length of baby at birth; incidence of meconium‐stained amniotic fluid; Apgar scores; results of umbilical cord pH determination; perinatal death
Notes	Funding: not reported Declarations of interest: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The method of sequence generation was not reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The method of allocation concealment was not reported.
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	Unclear risk	8/180 women in the induction group refused to be induced; and 3/165 women in the expectant group requested induction; and these 11 women were excluded from analysis post‐randomisation.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	No outcomes were prespecified in the methods, limited information was provided for some outcomes, e.g. "The incidence of prolonged labor was not different in both groups... both groups required analgesic treatment in 35%... Birthweight and length, the incidence of meconium‐stained amniotic fluid, of low Apgar scores, and the results of pH determination were not different between the two groups."
Other bias	Unclear risk	Some imbalance in the numbers randomised to each group (180 versus 165)