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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

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]  

  • 5. Fetal health surveillance in labour.
    Liston R; Crane J; Hamilton E; Hughes O; Kuling S; MacKinnon C; McNamara H; Milne K; Richardson B; Trépanie MJ; ;
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2002 Mar; 24(3):250-76; quiz 277-80. PubMed ID: 12196876
    [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]  

  • 8. Nonstress testing and perinatal outcome.
    Rayburn W; Greene J; Donaldson M
    J Reprod Med; 1980 May; 24(5):191-6. PubMed ID: 7401050
    [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]  

  • 17. Effect of halogen light stimulation on nonstress testing.
    Caridi BJ; Bolnick JM; Fletcher BG; Rayburn WF
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 May; 190(5):1470-2. PubMed ID: 15167872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Contraction stress test versus ductus venosus Doppler evaluation for the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in growth-restricted fetuses with non-reassuring non-stress test.
    Figueras F; Martínez JM; Puerto B; Coll O; Cararach V; Vanrell JA
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2003 Mar; 21(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12666219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Intermittent versus continuous electronic monitoring in labour: a randomised study.
    Herbst A; Ingemarsson I
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1994 Aug; 101(8):663-8. PubMed ID: 7947499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Fetal breathing movements and the nonstress test in high-risk pregnancies.
    Manning FA; Platt LD; Sipos L; Keegan KA
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1979 Oct; 135(4):511-5. PubMed ID: 484650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.