The assessment of uterine contractions is important in clinical decision‐making, but the precise role for appraising contractions remains controversial. Four clinical approaches to assessing contractions are available: manual palpation; intrauterine pressure determination; external tocodynamometry; and electrohysterography. Palpation is inexpensive and harmless but requires the constant bedside presence of a trained observer. Intrauterine pressure measurement is considered the most sensitive and specific technique, and has become the standard by which other methods are judged; however, its quantitative measurements are not always precise or reproducible. Moreover, the availability of intrauterine pressure measurements does not seem to improve maternal or neonatal outcomes in most situations. External tocodynamometry is the most widely used technique. It is easy to apply and provides reasonably accurate information about the frequency and duration of contractions, but not their amplitude. It can require frequent adjustment during labor and might not work well in patients who are obese. Electrohysterography is a recently available noninvasive technology that detects uterine electrical activity using electrodes placed on the mother's abdominal wall. This approach is at least as reliable and accurate as tocodynamometry. Techniques for assessing contractions present different advantages and limitations. Intrauterine pressure reflects labor progress unreliably; electrohysterography is well placed to become the standard technique.