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 *

89 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16340898)

  • 1. [What is the validity limit of patient reimbursement? Is age a criterion for refusal? Yes....].
    Belaisch-Allart J
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2005 Nov; 34(7 Pt 2):5S18-5S21. PubMed ID: 16340898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [What is the validity limit of patient reimbursement? Is age a criterion for refusal? No...].
    Brami C
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2005 Nov; 34(7 Pt 2):5S22-5S23. PubMed ID: 16340899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. ART in women 40 and over. Is the cost worth it?
    Legro RS; Shackleford DP; Moessner JM; Gnatuk CL; Dodson WC
    J Reprod Med; 1997 Feb; 42(2):76-82. PubMed ID: 9058341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Your ART ticket is no longer valid after how many attempts?].
    Antoine JM
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2005 Nov; 34(7 Pt 2):5S42-5S44. PubMed ID: 16340905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Is the concentration of plasma FSH a criterion for refusal?].
    Aubriot FX
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2005 Nov; 34(7 Pt 2):5S27-5S29. PubMed ID: 16340901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Assisted reproductive techniques in women aged 38 years or more].
    Lamarche C; Lévy R; Felloni B; de Mouzon J; Denis-Belicard E; Huss M; Maubon I; Aknin I; Seffert P
    Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2007 May; 35(5):420-9. PubMed ID: 17459756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clomiphene citrate and intrauterine insemination: analysis of more than 4100 cycles.
    Dovey S; Sneeringer RM; Penzias AS
    Fertil Steril; 2008 Dec; 90(6):2281-6. PubMed ID: 18191842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Age differences between sexual partners in the United States.
    Darroch JE; Landry DJ; Oslak S
    Fam Plann Perspect; 1999; 31(4):160-7. PubMed ID: 10435214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Success rates and cost of a live birth following fresh assisted reproduction treatment in women aged 45 years and older, Australia 2002-2004.
    Sullivan E; Wang Y; Chapman M; Chambers G
    Hum Reprod; 2008 Jul; 23(7):1639-43. PubMed ID: 18417497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Are French results in assisted reproductive techniques so bad?].
    Pouly JL; Larue L
    Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2007 Jan; 35(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 17208496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assisted reproductive technologies in Canada: 2005 results from the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register.
    Gunby J; Bissonnette F; Librach C; Cowan L;
    Fertil Steril; 2009 May; 91(5):1721-30. PubMed ID: 18423460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Poor success of gonadotropin-induced controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for older women.
    Harris ID; Missmer SA; Hornstein MD
    Fertil Steril; 2010 Jun; 94(1):144-8. PubMed ID: 19394605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2004: results generated from European registers by ESHRE.
    Andersen AN; Goossens V; Ferraretti AP; Bhattacharya S; Felberbaum R; de Mouzon J; Nygren KG; ;
    Hum Reprod; 2008 Apr; 23(4):756-71. PubMed ID: 18281243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Suspension of ART coverage: results of a survey in France].
    Olivennes F
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2005 Nov; 34(7 Pt 2):5S7-5S9. PubMed ID: 16340895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in Canada: 2002 results from the Canadian ART Register.
    Gunby J; Daya S;
    Fertil Steril; 2006 Nov; 86(5):1356-64. PubMed ID: 17070192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study of assisted hatching in women younger than 38 years undergoing in vitro fertilization.
    Hagemann AR; Lanzendorf SE; Jungheim ES; Chang AS; Ratts VS; Odem RR
    Fertil Steril; 2010 Feb; 93(2):586-91. PubMed ID: 19268926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Surgery or assisted reproduction? A decision analysis of treatment costs in male infertility.
    Meng MV; Greene KL; Turek PJ
    J Urol; 2005 Nov; 174(5):1926-31; discussion 1931. PubMed ID: 16217347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Individualized cost-effective conventional ovulation induction treatment in normogonadotrophic anovulatory infertility (WHO group 2).
    Eijkemans MJ; Polinder S; Mulders AG; Laven JS; Habbema JD; Fauser BC
    Hum Reprod; 2005 Oct; 20(10):2830-7. PubMed ID: 16006473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2001. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE.
    Andersen AN; Gianaroli L; Felberbaum R; de Mouzon J; Nygren KG;
    Hum Reprod; 2005 May; 20(5):1158-76. PubMed ID: 15665021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in Canada: 2006 results from the Canadian ART Register.
    Gunby J; Bissonnette F; Librach C; Cowan L;
    Fertil Steril; 2010 May; 93(7):2189-201. PubMed ID: 19439295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.