143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14748969)
1. Quality management in the ART laboratory.
Kastrop PM
Reprod Biomed Online; 2003 Dec; 7(6):691-4. PubMed ID: 14748969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Critical appraisal of the Vienna consensus: performance indicators for assisted reproductive technology laboratories.
Lopez-Regalado ML; Martínez-Granados L; González-Utor A; Ortiz N; Iglesias M; Ardoy M; Castilla JA;
Reprod Biomed Online; 2018 Aug; 37(2):128-132. PubMed ID: 29857986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Does the European Union Tissues and Cells Directive improve quality in the in vitro fertilization laboratory? A case study in a tertiary referral center.
Willemen D; D'Hooghe T; Knoops I; De Neubourg D; Spiessens C
Semin Reprod Med; 2012 Jun; 30(3):191-8. PubMed ID: 22585630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Key performance indicators score (KPIs-score) based on clinical and laboratorial parameters can establish benchmarks for internal quality control in an ART program.
Franco JG; Petersen CG; Mauri AL; Vagnini LD; Renzi A; Petersen B; Mattila MC; Comar VA; Ricci J; Dieamant F; Oliveira JBA; Baruffi RLR
JBRA Assist Reprod; 2017 Jun; 21(2):61-66. PubMed ID: 28609268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quality control in the ART laboratory: matters arising.
Albertini DF
J Assist Reprod Genet; 2015 Jul; 32(7):1007-8. PubMed ID: 26198139
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Cairo consensus on the IVF laboratory environment and air quality: report of an expert meeting.
Mortimer D; Cohen J; Mortimer ST; Fawzy M; McCulloh DH; Morbeck DE; Pollet-Villard X; Mansour RT; Brison DR; Doshi A; Harper JC; Swain JE; Gilligan AV
Reprod Biomed Online; 2018 Jun; 36(6):658-674. PubMed ID: 29656830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2000.
Wright VC; Schieve LA; Reynolds MA; Jeng G
MMWR Surveill Summ; 2003 Aug; 52(9):1-16. PubMed ID: 14532867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Semen analysis: its place in modern reproductive medical practice.
McLachlan RI; Baker HW; Clarke GN; Harrison KL; Matson PL; Holden CA; de Kretser DM; ; ;
Pathology; 2003 Feb; 35(1):25-33. PubMed ID: 12701680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance — United States, 2012.
Sunderam S; Kissin DM; Crawford SB; Folger SG; Jamieson DJ; Warner L; Barfield WD;
MMWR Surveill Summ; 2015 Aug; 64(6):1-29. PubMed ID: 26270152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Correct coding for laboratory procedures during assisted reproductive technology cycles.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine
Fertil Steril; 2004 Sep; 82 Suppl 1():S51-4. PubMed ID: 15363694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Revised minimum standards for practices offering assisted reproductive technologies.
;
Fertil Steril; 2008 Nov; 90(5 Suppl):S165-8. PubMed ID: 19007618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2011.
Sunderam S; Kissin DM; Crawford SB; Folger SG; Jamieson DJ; Barfield WD;
MMWR Surveill Summ; 2014 Nov; 63(10):1-28. PubMed ID: 25412164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2006.
Mansour R; Ishihara O; Adamson GD; Dyer S; de Mouzon J; Nygren KG; Sullivan E; Zegers-Hochschild F
Hum Reprod; 2014 Jul; 29(7):1536-51. PubMed ID: 24795090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The application of quality systems in ART programs.
Wikland M; Sjöblom C
Mol Cell Endocrinol; 2000 Aug; 166(1):3-7. PubMed ID: 10989201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comprehensive evaluation of contemporary assisted reproduction technology laboratory operations to determine staffing levels that promote patient safety and quality care.
Alikani M; Go KJ; McCaffrey C; McCulloh DH
Fertil Steril; 2014 Nov; 102(5):1350-6. PubMed ID: 25226853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of semen quality between university-based and private assisted reproductive technology laboratories.
Jensen CFS; Khan O; Sønksen J; Fode M; Dupree JM; Shah T; Ohl DA
Scand J Urol; 2018 Feb; 52(1):65-69. PubMed ID: 29191079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Experience with ISO quality control in assisted reproductive technology.
Alper MM;
Fertil Steril; 2013 Dec; 100(6):1503-8. PubMed ID: 24112531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2001.
Wright VC; Schieve LA; Reynolds MA; Jeng G; Kissin D
MMWR Surveill Summ; 2004 Apr; 53(1):1-20. PubMed ID: 15123982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Minimum standards for practices offering assisted reproductive technologies: a committee opinion.
; ;
Fertil Steril; 2020 Mar; 113(3):536-541. PubMed ID: 32111480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Patient and tissue identification in the assisted reproductive technology laboratory.
Pomeroy KO; Racowsky C
Semin Reprod Med; 2012 Jun; 30(3):173-81. PubMed ID: 22585628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
