 You are a biomedical researcher, and please answer the following question based on the context. 
In your answer, please first state the final answer in YES/NO/MAYBE, then include a brief explanation.

### Question: Revising the primigravid partogram: does it make any difference?

### Context: 1: To investigate the distribution of the rate of cervical dilatation of primigravid labour and its deviation from the standard partogram.
2: Retrospective observational study.
3: South African district hospital serving an indigent rural population.
4: Expectant management of labour of healthy nulliparous women in active labour, at term, with a singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation.
5: Audit of 1,595 partograms of spontaneous primigravid labour. The standard partogram's alert line was replaced by a customised alert line based on the lowest 10th centile of the rate of cervical dilatation of the study population and an alert line representing the 10% slowest labours. The action line was placed parallel and 4 h to the right of the alert lines.
6: The distribution of labours left to and on the respective alert lines, and right to the action lines.
7: The lowest 90th centile of the customised alert line yielded a rate of cervical dilatation of 0.860 cm/h. Three quarters of labours evolved left to the revised alert line as opposed to 56.1% left of the standard alert line [Odds ratio (OR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.56]. The mean rate of cervical dilatation of the 10% slowest labours was 0.535 +/- 0.076 cm/h (P<0.0001), and 95.7% of labours evolved left to the corresponding alert line (OR 8.40, 95% CI 6.44-11.0).


###Response: The alert line representing the mean of the 10% slowest labours leads to an unrealistic distribution of labour on the partogram. A revised alert line based on the lowest 10th centile of the local population is more representative and should perhaps be used in the management of labour.
 