348 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20052663)
21. Comparison of the learning curves of digital examination and transabdominal sonography for the determination of fetal head position during labor.
Rozenberg P; Porcher R; Salomon LJ; Boirot F; Morin C; Ville Y
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Mar; 31(3):332-7. PubMed ID: 18307213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Reference charts and equations of Korean fetal biometry.
Jung SI; Lee YH; Moon MH; Song MJ; Min JY; Kim JA; Park JH; Yang JH; Kim MY; Chung JH; Cho JY; Kim KG
Prenat Diagn; 2007 Jun; 27(6):545-51. PubMed ID: 17431930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The sonographic assessment of twin growth discordancy.
Hill LM; Guzick D; Chenevey P; Boyles D; Nedzesky P
Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Oct; 84(4):501-4. PubMed ID: 8090383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Ultrasound estimation of birth weight in twin pregnancy: comparison of biometry algorithms in the STORK multiple pregnancy cohort.
Khalil A; D'Antonio F; Dias T; Cooper D; Thilaganathan B;
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Aug; 44(2):210-20. PubMed ID: 24311473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Customizing fetal biometric charts.
Pang MW; Leung TN; Sahota DS; Lau TK; Chang AM
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2003 Sep; 22(3):271-6. PubMed ID: 12942500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility study of early fetal growth parameters.
Verburg BO; Mulder PG; Hofman A; Jaddoe VW; Witteman JC; Steegers EA
Prenat Diagn; 2008 Apr; 28(4):323-31. PubMed ID: 18324617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Charts for fetal age assessment based on fetal sonographic biometry in a population from Cali, Colombia.
Briceño F; Restrepo H; Paredes R; Cifuentes R
J Ultrasound Med; 2013 Dec; 32(12):2135-43. PubMed ID: 24277896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Does use of a sex-specific model improve the accuracy of sonographic weight estimation?
Melamed N; Yogev Y; Ben-Haroush A; Meizner I; Mashiach R; Glezerman M
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2012 May; 39(5):549-57. PubMed ID: 21837761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Sonographic examination does not predict twin growth discordance accurately.
Caravello JW; Chauhan SP; Morrison JC; Magann EF; Martin JN; Devoe LD
Obstet Gynecol; 1997 Apr; 89(4):529-33. PubMed ID: 9083307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Biometric assessment.
Kiserud T; Johnsen SL
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 2009 Dec; 23(6):819-31. PubMed ID: 19632901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The use of three-dimensional ultrasound does not improve training in fetal biometric measurements.
Chan LW; Ting YH; Lao TT; Chau MM; Fung TY; Leung TY; Sahota DS; Lau TK
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2011 Sep; 24(9):1173-5. PubMed ID: 21231840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Fetal Biometry in the Israeli Population: New Reference Charts.
Daniel-Spiegel E; Mandel M; Nevo D; Ben-Chetrit A; Shen O; Shalev E; Yagel S
Isr Med Assoc J; 2016 Jan; 18(1):40-4. PubMed ID: 26964279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A new sonographic weight formula for fetuses Siemer J; Hilbert A; Hart N; Meurer B; Goecke T; Schild RL
Ultraschall Med; 2009 Feb; 30(1):47-51. PubMed ID: 19137495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Which ultrasound or biochemical markers are independent predictors of small-for-gestational age?
Law LW; Leung TY; Sahota DS; Chan LW; Fung TY; Lau TK
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Sep; 34(3):283-7. PubMed ID: 19670336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The accuracy of gestation-adjusted projection method in estimating birth weight by sonographic fetal measurements in the third trimester.
Sritippayawan S; Anansakunwat W; Suthantikorn C
J Med Assoc Thai; 2007 Jun; 90(6):1058-67. PubMed ID: 17624197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. French fetal biometry: reference equations and comparison with other charts.
Salomon LJ; Duyme M; Crequat J; Brodaty G; Talmant C; Fries N; Althuser M
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Aug; 28(2):193-8. PubMed ID: 16570263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Intra- and interobserver variability in fetal ultrasound measurements.
Sarris I; Ioannou C; Chamberlain P; Ohuma E; Roseman F; Hoch L; Altman DG; Papageorghiou AT;
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Mar; 39(3):266-73. PubMed ID: 22535628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Ultrasonic fetal size measurements in Brisbane, Australia.
Schluter PJ; Pritchard G; Gill MA
Australas Radiol; 2004 Dec; 48(4):480-6. PubMed ID: 15601328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Predictive value of a single early fetal weight estimate in normal pregnancies.
Ben-Haroush A; Yogev Y; Hod M; Bar J
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2007 Feb; 130(2):187-92. PubMed ID: 16720074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Increased accuracy of fetal weight estimation with a gender-specific weight formula.
Siemer J; Wolf T; Hart N; Schrauder M; Meurer B; Goecker T; Beckmann MW; Schild RL
Fetal Diagn Ther; 2008; 24(4):321-6. PubMed ID: 18836268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
