1. Organization, W.H., WHO recommendations: induction of labour at or beyond term. 2018: Geneva.
2. WHO, World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for Induction of labour. 2011.
3. NICE, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Induction of labour: NICE clinical guideline 70. Manchester. 2008: Manchester.
4. Senanayake H., H.N.E., National Guidelines for Maternal and Newborn Care
Volume 1. Family Health Bureau, Ministry of Health, Colombo, 2013.
5. Delaney, M. and A. Roggensack, No. 214-Guidelines for the Management of Pregnancy at 41+0 to 42+0 Weeks. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 2017. 39(8): p. e164-e174.
6. WHO, World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: induction of labour at or beyond term. 2018: Geneva.
7. Coates, D., et al., Induction of labour indications and timing: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines. Women Birth, 2020. 33(3): p. 219-230.
8. Middleton, P., E. Shepherd, and C.A. Crowther, Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2018(5).
9. Muglu, J., et al., Risks of stillbirth and neonatal death with advancing gestation at term: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of 15 million pregnancies. PLoS Med, 2019. 16(7): p. e1002838.
10. Walker, K.F., et al., Randomized Trial of Labor Induction in Women 35 Years of Age or Older. New England Journal of Medicine, 2016. 374(9): p. 813-822.
11. Grobman, W.A., et al., Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women. N Engl J Med, 2018. 379(6): p. 513-523.
12. Grobman, W.A. and A.B. Caughey, Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2019. 221(4): p. 304-310.
13. Keulen, J.K., et al., Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial. BMJ, 2019. 364: p. l344.
14. Wennerholm, U.B., et al., Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial. BMJ, 2019. 367: p. l6131.
15. Rydahl, E., et al., Routine induction in late-term pregnancies: follow-up of a Danish induction of labour paradigm. BMJ Open, 2019. 9(12): p. e032815.
16. Rydahl, E., L. Eriksen, and M. Juhl, Effects of induction of labor prior to post-term in low-risk pregnancies: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep, 2019. 17(2): p. 170-208.
17. Coates, R., et al., Women's experiences of induction of labour: Qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis. Midwifery, 2019. 69: p. 17-28.
18. Downe, S., et al., What matters to women during childbirth: A systematic qualitative review. PLoS One, 2018. 13(4): p. e0194906.
19. Vogel, J.P., J.P. Souza, and A.M. Gülmezoglu, Patterns and Outcomes of Induction of Labour in Africa and Asia: A Secondary Analysis of the WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Neonatal Health. PLOS ONE, 2013. 8(6): p. e65612.
20. Yim, C., et al., Post-term surveillance and birth outcomes in South Asian-born compared with Australian-born women. J Perinatol, 2017. 37(2): p. 139-143.
21. Cox, A.G., et al., The influence of maternal ethnicity on neonatal respiratory outcome. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 2020. 105(1): p. 50-55.
22. Balchin, I., et al., Racial variation in the association between gestational age and perinatal mortality: prospective study. BMJ, 2007. 334(7598): p. 833.
23. STROBE. STROBE Statement. STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology. 2009. https://www.strobe-statement.org/index.php?id=strobe-home. 2009 [cited 2020 15 Jul ].
24. Lazzerini, M., et al., Implementation of an individual patient prospective database of hospital births in Sri Lanka and its use for improving quality of care. 2019.
25. Consultation, W.W.H.O.E., Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies. Lancet, 2004. 363 North American Edition(9403): p. 157-163.
26. Senanayake, H., et al., Implementation of the WHO manual for Robson classification: an example from Sri Lanka using a local database for developing quality improvement recommendations. BMJ open, 2019. 9(2): p. e027317.
27. Bligard, K.H., K.L. Lipsey, and O.M. Young, Simulation Training for Operative Vaginal Delivery Among Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents A Systematic Review. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2019. 134: p. 16S-21S.
28. Bailey, P.E., et al., Assisted vaginal delivery in low and middle income countries: an overview. BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2017. 124(9): p. 1335-1344.
29. Jordal, M., K. Wijewardena, and P. Olsson, Unmarried women's ways of facing single motherhood in Sri Lanka - a qualitative interview study. BMC Womens Health, 2013. 13: p. 5.
30. Raifman, S., A.J. Cunha, and M.C. Castro, Factors associated with high rates of caesarean section in Brazil between 1991 and 2006. Acta Paediatr, 2014. 103(7): p. e295-9.
31. Mostafa Kamal, S.M., Preference for institutional delivery and caesarean sections in Bangladesh. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 2013. 31(1): p. 96-109.
32. Boatin, A.A., et al., Within country inequalities in caesarean section rates: observational study of 72 low and middle income countries. 2018.
33. Zimmo, M., et al., Differences in rates and odds for emergency caesarean section in six Palestinian hospitals: A population-based birth cohort study. BMJ Open, 2018. 8(3).
34. Wehberg, S., et al., Risk factors and between-hospital variation of caesarean section in Denmark: A cohort study. BMJ Open, 2018. 8(2).
35. Coates, D., et al., A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour. PLoS One, 2020. 15(1): p. e0228196.
36. Einerson, B.D. and W.A. Grobman, Elective induction of labor: friend or foe? Seminars in Perinatology, 2020. 44(2).