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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21723742)

  • 1. Increased use of intrauterine contraception in California, 1997 to 2007.
    Thompson KM; Foster DG; Harper CC
    Womens Health Issues; 2011; 21(6):425-30. PubMed ID: 21723742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 3 of 4): Chapter 7--Intrauterine Contraception.
    Black A; Guilbert E; Costescu D; Dunn S; Fisher W; Kives S; Mirosh M; Norman W; Pymar H; Reid R; Roy G; Varto H; Waddington A; Wagner MS; Whelan AM; Mansouri S
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2016 Feb; 38(2):182-222. PubMed ID: 27032746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Characteristics of users of intrauterine devices and other reversible contraceptive methods in the United States.
    Xu X; Macaluso M; Frost J; Anderson JE; Curtis K; Grosse SD
    Fertil Steril; 2011 Nov; 96(5):1138-44. PubMed ID: 21917255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Contraceptive failure in the United States: the impact of social economic and demographic factors (author's transl)].
    Schirm AL; Trussell J; Menken J; Grady WR
    Contracept Fertil Sex (Paris); 1983 Apr; 11(4):659-73. PubMed ID: 12338614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods.
    Kavanaugh ML; Jerman J; Hubacher D; Kost K; Finer LB
    Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Jun; 117(6):1349-1357. PubMed ID: 21606745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Provider and lay perspectives on intra-uterine contraception: a global review.
    Daniele MAS; Cleland J; Benova L; Ali M
    Reprod Health; 2017 Sep; 14(1):119. PubMed ID: 28950913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Barriers and myths that limit the use of intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women: a survey of Brazilian gynaecologists.
    da Silva-Filho AL; Lira J; Rocha ALL; Carneiro MM
    Postgrad Med J; 2017 Jul; 93(1101):376-381. PubMed ID: 27780879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Identifying counseling needs of nulliparous adolescent intrauterine contraceptive users: a qualitative approach.
    Brown MK; Auerswald C; Eyre SL; Deardorff J; Dehlendorf C
    J Adolesc Health; 2013 Mar; 52(3):293-300. PubMed ID: 23299012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Risk of unintended pregnancy based on intended compared to actual contraceptive use.
    Reeves MF; Zhao Q; Secura GM; Peipert JF
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Jul; 215(1):71.e1-6. PubMed ID: 26805610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Perceptions of intrauterine contraception among women seeking primary care.
    Callegari LS; Parisi SM; Schwarz EB
    Contraception; 2013 Aug; 88(2):269-74. PubMed ID: 23521810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Changes in the Use of Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Methods Among U.S. Nulliparous Women: Results from the 2006-2010, 2011-2013, and 2013-2015 National Survey of Family Growth.
    Ihongbe TO; Masho SW
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2018 Mar; 27(3):245-252. PubMed ID: 29148890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Understanding the barriers and myths limiting the use of intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women: results of a survey of European/Canadian healthcare providers.
    Buhling KJ; Hauck B; Dermout S; Ardaens K; Marions L
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2014 Dec; 183():146-54. PubMed ID: 25461369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Family planning and Zika virus: need for renewed and cohesive efforts to ensure availability of intrauterine contraception in Latin America and the Caribbean.
    Ali M; Miller K; Gómez Ponce de Leon RF
    Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care; 2017 Apr; 22(2):102-106. PubMed ID: 28256913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Choice of contraceptive modality by women in Norway.
    Skjeldestad FE
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 1994 Jan; 73(1):48-52. PubMed ID: 8304025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Intrauterine contraception: attitudes, practice, and knowledge among Swedish health care providers.
    Ekelund M; Melander M; Gemzell-Danielsson K
    Contraception; 2014 May; 89(5):407-12. PubMed ID: 24485096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Understanding U.S. fertility: findings from the National Survey of Family Growth, Cycle III.
    Pratt WF; Mosher WD; Bachrach CA; Horn MC
    Popul Bull; 1984 Dec; 39(5):3-42. PubMed ID: 12266654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Characteristics of women who stop using contraceptives.
    Hammerslough CR
    Fam Plann Perspect; 1984; 16(1):14-8. PubMed ID: 6714376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bias in Contraceptive Provision to Young Women Among Private Health Care Providers in South West Nigeria.
    Sieverding M; Schatzkin E; Shen J; Liu J
    Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health; 2018 Mar; 44(1):19-29. PubMed ID: 30028307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Trends in contraception and sterilization in Australia.
    Santow G
    Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 1991 Aug; 31(3):201-8. PubMed ID: 1804078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Trends of contraception use among married reproductive age women: Tehran lipid and glucose cohort study 2002-2011.
    Behboudi-Gandevani S; Ramezani Tehrani F; Cheraghi L; Noroozzadeh M; Farahmand M; Azizi F
    Sex Reprod Healthc; 2017 Jun; 12():116-122. PubMed ID: 28477923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.