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 *

48 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22268669)

  • 1. Evaluation of Cohen's cross-section trichometer for measuring hair quantity.
    Hendriks MA; Geerts PA; Dercksen MW; van den Hurk CJ; Breed WP
    Dermatol Surg; 2012 Apr; 38(4):631-4. PubMed ID: 22268669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The cross-section trichometer: a new device for measuring hair quantity, hair loss, and hair growth.
    Cohen B
    Dermatol Surg; 2008 Jul; 34(7):900-10; discussion 910-1. PubMed ID: 18384368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cross-section Trichometry: A Clinical Tool for Assessing the Progression and Treatment Response of Alopecia.
    Wikramanayake TC; Mauro LM; Tabas IA; Chen AL; Llanes IC; Jimenez JJ
    Int J Trichology; 2012 Oct; 4(4):259-64. PubMed ID: 23766610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Hair mass index obtained by cross-section trichometry: an objective and clinically useful parameter to quantify hair in chemotherapy-induced alopecia.
    Vleut RE; van Poppel JE; Dercksen MW; Peerbooms M; Houterman S; Breed WP
    Support Care Cancer; 2013 Jul; 21(7):1807-14. PubMed ID: 23338231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of central corneal thickness using optical low-coherence reflectometry and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography.
    López-Miguel A; Correa-Pérez ME; Miranda-Anta S; Iglesias-Cortiñas D; Coco-Martín MB; Maldonado MJ
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2012 May; 38(5):758-64. PubMed ID: 22436868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Reliability and sensitivity of visual scales versus volumetry for evaluating white matter hyperintensity progression.
    Gouw AA; van der Flier WM; van Straaten EC; Pantoni L; Bastos-Leite AJ; Inzitari D; Erkinjuntti T; Wahlund LO; Ryberg C; Schmidt R; Fazekas F; Scheltens P; Barkhof F;
    Cerebrovasc Dis; 2008; 25(3):247-53. PubMed ID: 18216467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Observer interpretation variability of peripapillary flow using the Heidelberg Retina Flowmeter.
    Iester M; Ciancaglini M; Rolle T; Vattovani O
    Eye (Lond); 2006 Nov; 20(11):1246-53. PubMed ID: 16254592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reproducibility and repeatability of transabdominal uterine artery Doppler velocimetry between 10 and 14 weeks of gestation.
    Hollis B; Mavrides E; Campbell S; Tekay A; Thilaganathan B
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Dec; 18(6):593-7. PubMed ID: 11844196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Reliability of the KT-1000 arthrometer in measuring anterior laxity of the knee: comparative analysis with Telos of 48 reconstructions of the anterior cruciate ligament and intra- and interobserver reproducibility].
    Jardin C; Chantelot C; Migaud H; Gougeon F; Debroucker MJ; Duquennoy A
    Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot; 1999 Nov; 85(7):698-707. PubMed ID: 10612134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of fetal biometry.
    Perni SC; Chervenak FA; Kalish RB; Magherini-Rothe S; Predanic M; Streltzoff J; Skupski DW
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Nov; 24(6):654-8. PubMed ID: 15476300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Reproducibility of subfoveal choroidal thickness measurements with enhanced depth imaging by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography.
    Shao L; Xu L; Chen CX; Yang LH; Du KF; Wang S; Zhou JQ; Wang YX; You QS; Jonas JB; Wei WB
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Jan; 54(1):230-3. PubMed ID: 23060144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Pilometric methods-contributions and critical aspects.
    Reuer E
    Anthropol Anz; 1976 Mar; 35(2-3):154-72. PubMed ID: 984740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reproducibility of optical coherence tomography measurements in children.
    Altemir I; Pueyo V; Elía N; Polo V; Larrosa JM; Oros D
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2013 Jan; 155(1):171-176.e1. PubMed ID: 22967864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intraobserver and interobserver variability of measuring waist circumference.
    Nádas J; Putz Z; Kolev G; Nagy S; Jermendy G
    Med Sci Monit; 2008 Jan; 14(1):CR15-18. PubMed ID: 18160939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility of peripheral blood and oxygen pressure measurements in the assessment of lower extremity arterial disease.
    de Graaff JC; Ubbink DT; Legemate DA; de Haan RJ; Jacobs MJ
    J Vasc Surg; 2001 May; 33(5):1033-40. PubMed ID: 11331846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of the Nidek EAS-1000 Anterior Eye Segment Analysis System.
    Baez KA; Orengo S; Gandham S; Spaeth GL
    Ophthalmic Surg; 1992 Jun; 23(6):426-8. PubMed ID: 1513541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement, reproducibility, and accuracy of computed tomographic measurements of pituitary gland dimensions in healthy dogs.
    van der Vlugt-Meijer RH; Meij BP; Voorhout G
    Am J Vet Res; 2006 Oct; 67(10):1750-5. PubMed ID: 17014327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Anterior chamber angle measurement with optical coherence tomography: intraobserver and interobserver variability.
    Müller M; Dahmen G; Pörksen E; Geerling G; Laqua H; Ziegler A; Hoerauf H
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Nov; 32(11):1803-8. PubMed ID: 17081861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Validity and interobserver agreement of lower extremity local tissue water measurements in healthy women using tissue dielectric constant.
    Jensen MR; Birkballe S; Nørregaard S; Karlsmark T
    Clin Physiol Funct Imaging; 2012 Jul; 32(4):317-22. PubMed ID: 22681610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Post hoc interpretation of urodynamic evaluation is qualitatively different than interpretation at the time of urodynamic study.
    Smith PP; Hurtado EA; Appell RA
    Neurourol Urodyn; 2009; 28(8):998-1002. PubMed ID: 19322793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.