These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11370697)
1. A comparison of two time intervals for the ausculated acceleration test. Paine LL; Zanardi LR; Johnson TR; Rorie JA; Barger MK J Midwifery Womens Health; 2001; 46(2):98-102. PubMed ID: 11370697 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparison of the auscultated acceleration test and the nonstress test as predictors of perinatal outcomes. Paine LL; Benedict MI; Strobino DM; Gegor CL; Larson EL Nurs Res; 1992; 41(2):87-91. PubMed ID: 1549525 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Auscultated fetal heart rate accelerations. An alternative to the nonstress test. Daniels SM; Boehm N J Nurse Midwifery; 1991; 36(2):88-94. PubMed ID: 2037878 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A randomized trial of intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring versus intermittent auscultation. Vintzileos AM; Antsaklis A; Varvarigos I; Papas C; Sofatzis I; Montgomery JT Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Jun; 81(6):899-907. PubMed ID: 8497353 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparative study of stressed and nonstressed antepartum fetal heart rate testing. Keane MW; Horger EO; Vice L Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Mar; 57(3):320-4. PubMed ID: 7465146 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Auscultated fetal heart rate accelerations. III. Use of vibratory acoustic stimulation. Paine LL; Johnson TR; Alexander GR Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1988 Nov; 159(5):1163-7. PubMed ID: 3189452 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Intermittent Auscultation for Intrapartum Fetal Heart Rate Surveillance: American College of Nurse-Midwives. J Midwifery Womens Health; 2015; 60(5):626-32. PubMed ID: 26461195 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Antepartum predictors of fetal distress in postterm pregnancy. Bochner CJ; Medearis AL; Davis J; Oakes GK; Hobel CJ; Wade ME Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1987 Aug; 157(2):353-8. PubMed ID: 3618684 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Population differences affect the interpretation of fetal nonstress test results. Johnson TR; Paine LL; Strobino DM; Witter FR Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1998 Sep; 179(3 Pt 1):779-83. PubMed ID: 9757989 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Antepartum surveillance in diabetic pregnancies: predictors of fetal distress in labor. Kjos SL; Leung A; Henry OA; Victor MR; Paul RH; Medearis AL Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Nov; 173(5):1532-9. PubMed ID: 7503197 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Intrapartum electronic fetal heart rate monitoring versus intermittent auscultation: a meta-analysis. Vintzileos AM; Nochimson DJ; Guzman ER; Knuppel RA; Lake M; Schifrin BS Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Jan; 85(1):149-55. PubMed ID: 7800313 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Amniotic fluid index and perinatal morbidity. Dizon-Townson D; Kennedy KA; Dildy GA; Wu J; Egger M; Clark SL Am J Perinatol; 1996 May; 13(4):231-4. PubMed ID: 8724725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The rapid biophysical profile for assessment of fetal well-being. Tongsong T; Piyamongkol W; Anantachote A; Pulphutapong K J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 1999 Dec; 25(6):431-6. PubMed ID: 10680342 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Amniotic fluid volume as a predictor of fetal distress in intrauterine growth retardation. Tongsong T; Srisomboon J Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 1993 Feb; 40(2):131-4. PubMed ID: 8094682 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]