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 *

94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1149898)

  • 1. Comparison of three intrauterine contraceptive devices: the Antigon-F, the Ypsilon-Y, and the Copper-T 200.
    Lauersen N; Cederqvist L; Donovan S; Fuchs F
    Fertil Steril; 1975 Jul; 26(7):638-48. PubMed ID: 1149898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Experiences with Antigon-F for intrauterine contraception].
    Cederqvist LL; Lauersen NH; Fuchs F
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1979 Sep; 141(37):2521-4. PubMed ID: 483438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Immediate post-partum insertion of the Antigon.
    Wiese J; Osler M
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 1977; 56(5):509-13. PubMed ID: 602724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The Nova-T 200 intrauterine contraceptive device: a 12 year study.
    Baeyertz JD; Hartfield VJ
    N Z Med J; 1997 May; 110(1043):169-71. PubMed ID: 9196502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Experience with the Ypsilon (Soichet) intrauterine device.
    Yarkoni S; Sadovsky E
    Isr J Med Sci; 1978 Feb; 14(2):267-70. PubMed ID: 649355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A randomized comparison of the Ypsilon-Y and Lippes loop D intrauterine devices in parous women.
    Brenner PF; Roy S; Mishell DR
    Obstet Gynecol; 1978 Mar; 51(3):327-9. PubMed ID: 628535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Copper-7 intrauterine device (Gravigard). Report of experience].
    Jürgensen O; Stenzel I; Wirth A; Sina D; Taubert HD
    Fortschr Med; 1976 Mar; 94(9):515-21. PubMed ID: 964914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 3 of 4): Chapter 7--Intrauterine Contraception.
    Black A; Guilbert E; Costescu D; Dunn S; Fisher W; Kives S; Mirosh M; Norman W; Pymar H; Reid R; Roy G; Varto H; Waddington A; Wagner MS; Whelan AM; Mansouri S
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2016 Feb; 38(2):182-222. PubMed ID: 27032746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Efficiency and acceptability of intrauterine contraceptive devices.
    Trutko NS
    Acta Med Hung; 1986; 43(2):103-8. PubMed ID: 3588154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Continuous intrauterine copper contraception for 3 years: comparison of replacement at 2 years with continuation of use.
    Newton J; Illingworth R; Elias J; McEwan J
    Br Med J; 1977 Jan; 1(6055):197-9. PubMed ID: 832073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Intrauterine devices: an effective alternative to oral hormonal contraception.
    Prescrire Int; 2009 Jun; 18(101):125-30. PubMed ID: 19637436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Experience with the copper intrauterine device cu-7 (authors transl)].
    Erb H
    Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax; 1976 Aug; 65(32):973-6. PubMed ID: 995856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A three-year study of the copper-7 minigravigard intrauterine contraceptive device in nulliparous women.
    Srisupandit S
    J Med Assoc Thai; 1988 Jun; 71(6):294-7. PubMed ID: 3171448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative study of safety and efficacy of IUD insertions by physicians and nursing personnel in Brazil.
    Lassner KJ; Chen CH; Kropsch LA; Oberle MW; Lopes IM; Morris L
    Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1995 Sep; 29(3):206-15. PubMed ID: 8520606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Performances of copper T 380A and multiload copper 375/250 intrauterine contraceptive devices in a comparative clinical trial.
    Arowojolu AO; Otolorin EO; Ladipo OA
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 1995 Mar; 24(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 7495202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical evaluation and follow-up on 3,829 IUD procedures.
    Hindle WH
    Trans Pac Coast Obstet Gynecol Soc; 1978; 45():105-10. PubMed ID: 715859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Two years' experience with two levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and one copper-releasing intrauterine device: a randomized comparative performance study.
    Nilsson CG; Allonen H; Diaz J; Luukkainen T
    Fertil Steril; 1983 Feb; 39(2):187-92. PubMed ID: 6401636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Intrauterine contraception with the Antigon-F device.
    Cederqvist LL; Lauersen NH; Donovan S; Fuchs F
    Adv Plan Parent; 1975; 10(1):23-8. PubMed ID: 1164984
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of the delta copper T and the copper T 200 in Bologna, Italy.
    Melega C; Biscontin S; Canedi L; Marchesini FP; Tirelli S; Bartolotti T; Flamigni C
    Acta Eur Fertil; 1986; 17(1):39-41. PubMed ID: 3727892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparative controlled trial in rural Thailand of three intrauterine devices.
    Somboonsuk A; Israngkum C; Siriwongse T; Dusitsin N; Onthuam Y; Chaudhury RR; Fuchs F; Grossman R; Gray R
    Contraception; 1978 Aug; 18(2):137-50. PubMed ID: 688751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.