trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Induction of labour increases the risk of a repeat caesarean section or rupture of a uterine scar in women who have had a previous caesarean section.

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that induction of labour increases the risk of a repeat caesarean section or rupture of a uterine scar in women who have had a previous caesarean section?

Yes. Evidence indicates that induction of labor in women with a prior cesarean delivery increases the risk of uterine rupture and affects the success of trial of labor compared to spontaneous onset.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 2 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

Evidence for · 2
Uterine rupture risk during trial of labor after one cesarean in a population-based cohort study of induction method and labor management.
2026
Induction of labor in women with a previous cesarean section is associated with significantly higher odds of uterine rupture compared to spontaneous onset, particularly when prostaglandins are used.
Get citation
C, R. H., Ä, M., I, H., K, J., & CL, W. (2026). Uterine rupture risk during trial of labor after one cesarean in a population-based cohort study of induction method and labor management.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-48444-z

See more details
More for · 1
The uterine scar dilemma: Outcomes of a restricted elective repeat cesarean section policy in a high-fertility, resource-limited setting.
2026
Spontaneous labor onset is associated with a higher likelihood of successful vaginal birth after cesarean, whereas induction methods like misoprostol carry complications.
Get citation
R, B., G, D. L., K, P., L, L., K, W., R, W., N, A., S, S., M, O., T, S., S, A., E, M., G, B., D, D. S., F, R., G, R., & M, L. (2026). The uterine scar dilemma: Outcomes of a restricted elective repeat cesarean section policy in a high-fertility, resource-limited setting.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.70219

Receipt History
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work