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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17236522)

  • 1. The use of the Zebris motion analysis system for measuring cervical spine movements in vivo.
    Quinlan JF; Mullett H; Stapleton R; FitzPatrick D; McCormack D
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2006 Nov; 220(8):889-96. PubMed ID: 17236522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of efficacy and 3D kinematic characteristics of cervical orthoses.
    Zhang S; Wortley M; Clowers K; Krusenklaus JH
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2005 Mar; 20(3):264-9. PubMed ID: 15698698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effectiveness of various cervical orthoses. An in vivo comparison of the mechanical stability provided by several widely used models.
    Sandler AJ; Dvorak J; Humke T; Grob D; Daniels W
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1996 Jul; 21(14):1624-9. PubMed ID: 8839463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of 2 different thoracolumbar orthoses on the stability of the spine during various body movements.
    Kienle A; Saidi S; Oberst M
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Aug; 38(17):E1082-9. PubMed ID: 23644685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cervical spine ROM measurements: optimizing the testing protocol by using a 3D ultrasound-based motion analysis system.
    Strimpakos N; Sakellari V; Gioftsos G; Papathanasiou M; Brountzos E; Kelekis D; Kapreli E; Oldham J
    Cephalalgia; 2005 Dec; 25(12):1133-45. PubMed ID: 16305602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Do cervical collars and cervicothoracic orthoses effectively stabilize the injured cervical spine? A biomechanical investigation.
    Ivancic PC
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Jun; 38(13):E767-74. PubMed ID: 23486409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Normal functional range of motion of the cervical spine during 15 activities of daily living.
    Bible JE; Biswas D; Miller CP; Whang PG; Grauer JN
    J Spinal Disord Tech; 2010 Feb; 23(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 20051924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Zebris versus Myrin: a comparative study between a three-dimensional ultrasound movement analysis and an inclinometer/compass method: intradevice reliability, concurrent validity, intertester comparison, intratester reliability, and intraindividual variability.
    Malmström EM; Karlberg M; Melander A; Magnusson M
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Nov; 28(21):E433-40. PubMed ID: 14595170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Kinematics of the upper cervical spine in rotation: in vivo three-dimensional analysis.
    Ishii T; Mukai Y; Hosono N; Sakaura H; Nakajima Y; Sato Y; Sugamoto K; Yoshikawa H
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2004 Apr; 29(7):E139-44. PubMed ID: 15087810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessing range of motion to evaluate the adverse effects of ill-fitting cervical orthoses.
    Bell KM; Frazier EC; Shively CM; Hartman RA; Ulibarri JC; Lee JY; Kang JD; Donaldson WF
    Spine J; 2009 Mar; 9(3):225-31. PubMed ID: 18504164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dynamic response of the cervical spine to posteroanterior mobilisation.
    Lee RY; McGregor AH; Bull AM; Wragg P
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2005 Feb; 20(2):228-31. PubMed ID: 15621330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Three-dimensional motion analysis of the cervical spine for comparison of anterior cervical decompression and fusion versus artificial disc replacement in 17 patients: clinical article.
    McDonald CP; Chang V; McDonald M; Ramo N; Bey MJ; Bartol S
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2014 Mar; 20(3):245-55. PubMed ID: 24359000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A 3D motion analysis study comparing the effectiveness of cervical spine orthoses at restricting spinal motion through physiological ranges.
    Evans NR; Hooper G; Edwards R; Whatling G; Sparkes V; Holt C; Ahuja S
    Eur Spine J; 2013 Mar; 22 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S10-5. PubMed ID: 23288458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Three-dimensional dynamic in vivo motion of the cervical spine: assessment of measurement accuracy and preliminary findings.
    McDonald CP; Bachison CC; Chang V; Bartol SW; Bey MJ
    Spine J; 2010 Jun; 10(6):497-504. PubMed ID: 20359957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Soft and rigid collars provide similar restriction in cervical range of motion during fifteen activities of daily living.
    Miller CP; Bible JE; Jegede KA; Whang PG; Grauer JN
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Jun; 35(13):1271-8. PubMed ID: 20512025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Kinematics of the cervical spine in lateral bending: in vivo three-dimensional analysis.
    Ishii T; Mukai Y; Hosono N; Sakaura H; Fujii R; Nakajima Y; Tamura S; Iwasaki M; Yoshikawa H; Sugamoto K
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Jan; 31(2):155-60. PubMed ID: 16418633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Application of a stand-alone interbody fusion cage based on a novel porous TiO2/glass ceramic--2: Biomechanical evaluation after implantation in the sheep cervical spine].
    Korinth MC; Hero T; Pandorf T; Zell D
    Biomed Tech (Berl); 2005 Apr; 50(4):111-8. PubMed ID: 15884708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Study of Cobb Angular Velocity in Cervical Spine during Dynamic Extension-Flexion.
    Ren D; Hu Z; Yuan W
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2016 Apr; 41(7):E410-5. PubMed ID: 26583468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. In vivo three-dimensional kinematics of the cervical spine during maximal axial rotation.
    Salem W; Lenders C; Mathieu J; Hermanus N; Klein P
    Man Ther; 2013 Aug; 18(4):339-44. PubMed ID: 23375147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Biomechanical analysis of cervical orthoses in flexion and extension: a comparison of cervical collars and cervical thoracic orthoses.
    Gavin TM; Carandang G; Havey R; Flanagan P; Ghanayem A; Patwardhan AG
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2003; 40(6):527-37. PubMed ID: 15077665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.