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 *

622 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17260215)

  • 21. [A qualitative study of pregnant women's choice of nuchal translucency measurement].
    Lou S; Dahl K; Risør MB; Hvidman LE; Thomsen SG; Jørgensen FS; Olesen F; Kjaergaard H; Kesmodel U
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2007 Mar; 169(10):914-8. PubMed ID: 17359736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A meta-synthesis of pregnant women's decision-making processes with regard to antenatal screening for Down syndrome.
    Reid B; Sinclair M; Barr O; Dobbs F; Crealey G
    Soc Sci Med; 2009 Dec; 69(11):1561-73. PubMed ID: 19783085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Informed decision-making in prenatal screening for Down's syndrome: what knowledge is relevant?
    Schoonen HM; van Agt HM; Essink-Bot ML; Wildschut HI; Steegers EA; de Koning HJ
    Patient Educ Couns; 2011 Aug; 84(2):265-70. PubMed ID: 20800415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A randomised controlled trial of a decision-aid leaflet to facilitate women's choice between pregnancy termination methods.
    Wong SS; Thornton JG; Gbolade B; Bekker HL
    BJOG; 2006 Jun; 113(6):688-94. PubMed ID: 16709212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Informed choice in women attending private clinics to undergo first-trimester screening for Down syndrome.
    Jaques AM; Sheffield LJ; Halliday JL
    Prenat Diagn; 2005 Aug; 25(8):656-64. PubMed ID: 16049990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Informed choice and decision-making in family planning counseling in Kenya.
    Kim YM; Kols A; Mucheke S
    Int Fam Plann Persp; 1998 Mar; 24(1):4-11, 42. PubMed ID: 11660682
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [Information disclosure when screening for trisomy 21: a decision-making aid for pregnant women?].
    Seror V; Aymé S
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2001 Feb; 30(1 Suppl):80-4. PubMed ID: 11240521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Psychological responses to prenatal NTS counseling and the uptake of invasive testing in women of advanced maternal age.
    Kaiser AS; Ferris LE; Katz R; Pastuszak A; Llewellyn-Thomas H; Johnson JA; Shaw BF
    Patient Educ Couns; 2004 Jul; 54(1):45-53. PubMed ID: 15210259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Ethnic differences in determinants of participation and non-participation in prenatal screening for Down syndrome: a theoretical framework.
    Fransen MP; Essink-Bot ML; Oenema A; Mackenbach JP; Steegers EA; Wildschut HI
    Prenat Diagn; 2007 Oct; 27(10):938-50. PubMed ID: 17597492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Development and preliminary testing of a patient decision aid to assist pharmaceutical care in the prevention of cardiovascular disease.
    Lalonde L; O'Connor AM; Drake E; Duguay P; Lowensteyn I; Grover SA
    Pharmacotherapy; 2004 Jul; 24(7):909-22. PubMed ID: 15303454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Are counsellors' attitudes influencing pregnant women's attitudes and decisions on prenatal screening?
    van den Berg M; Timmermans DR; Kleinveld JH; van Eijk JT; Knol DL; van der Wal G; van Vugt JM
    Prenat Diagn; 2007 Jun; 27(6):518-24. PubMed ID: 17367105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Communication with patients during the prenatal testing procedure: an explorative qualitative study.
    van Zwieten M; Willems D; Knegt L; Leschot N
    Patient Educ Couns; 2006 Oct; 63(1-2):161-8. PubMed ID: 16406463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Risk assessment and risk distortion: finding the balance.
    Jordan RG; Murphy PA
    J Midwifery Womens Health; 2009; 54(3):191-200. PubMed ID: 19410211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Enhancing patient autonomy with risk assessment and invasive diagnosis: an ethical solution to a clinical challenge.
    Chervenak FA; McCullough LB; Sharma G; Davis J; Gross S
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Jul; 199(1):19.e1-4. PubMed ID: 18355783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A survey of the knowledge and attitudes of pregnant Thai women towards Down syndrome screening.
    Pruksanusak N; Suwanrath C; Kor-Anantakul O; Prasartwanakit V; Leetanaporn R; Suntharasaj T; Hanprasertpong T
    J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2009 Oct; 35(5):876-81. PubMed ID: 20149035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. People who influence women's decisions and preferred sources of information about prenatal testing for birth defects.
    Jaques AM; Bell RJ; Watson L; Halliday JL
    Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2004 Jun; 44(3):233-8. PubMed ID: 15191448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Reconsidering prenatal screening: an empirical-ethical approach to understand moral dilemmas as a question of personal preferences.
    García E; Timmermans DR; van Leeuwen E
    J Med Ethics; 2009 Jul; 35(7):410-4. PubMed ID: 19567688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Prenatal diagnosis: chances, choices.
    Roberts SF
    J Fla Med Assoc; 1997; 84(6):374-8. PubMed ID: 9379162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. On what grounds do women participate in prenatal screening?
    Santalahti P; Aro AR; Hemminki E; Helenius H; Ryynänen M
    Prenat Diagn; 1998 Feb; 18(2):153-65. PubMed ID: 9516017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Converting the informed consent from a perfunctory process to an evidence-based foundation for patient decision making.
    Arnold SV; Decker C; Ahmad H; Olabiyi O; Mundluru S; Reid KJ; Soto GE; Gansert S; Spertus JA
    Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2008 Sep; 1(1):21-8. PubMed ID: 20031784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 32.