Back

Labour Induction in low-risk women at 39 weeks of gestation: a Randomised trial in China (LIRIC) - Protocol of an open label, randomised controlled trial

Gao, H.; Shen, J.; Chen, D.; Mol, B. W.; Hun, W.; Liang, Z.; Bai, X.; Han, X.; Zhu, J.; Wang, H.; Liu, X.; Su, C.; Weng, R.; Liu, Y.; Li, W.; Zhang, D.

2026-05-26 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.05.24.26354001 medRxiv
Show abstract

Abstract Introduction The ARRIVE trial first demonstrated that elective induction of labour (IOL) at 39 weeks in low-risk pregnancies reduced the likelihood of caesarean section (CS) without compromising perinatal safety; however, the generalizability of these findings remains debated, leading to uncertainty in clinical practice. The LIRIC trial aims to evaluate whether 39-week elective IOL reduces CS rates compared with expectant management, while exploring its impact on infant neurodevelopment and multi-omics profiles. Methods and analysis This is a single-centre, open-label, randomized controlled trial in China. A total of 1,074 low-risk pregnant women (nulliparous or multiparous) will be randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to either 39-week IOL or expectant management. The primary outcome is the caesarean section (CS) rate. Secondary outcomes include a composite of severe neonatal morbidity and perinatal mortality and infant neurodevelopmental scores (Bayley-4 and ASQ-3), among others. Data analysis will follow the Intention-to-Treat (ITT) principle. Biospecimen will be collected for metagenomic and metabolomic analyses, with results to be reported separately. Ethics and dissemination The protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals, and standardized infant developmental reports will be provided to participants to enhance study benefit. Trial registration number NCT07082530.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.2%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 11%
15.2%
3
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
10.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 15%
6.6%
6
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
5.0%
7
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
8
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
9
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
10
Human Reproduction
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
11
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
12
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
13
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
14
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.3%
15
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
16
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
17
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
18
Nutrients
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
20
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
13 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
22
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
Computational Biology and Chemistry
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 61%
0.8%
25
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
26
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
27
JAMA
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
Journal of Medical Economics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.5%
30
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%