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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24251216)

  • 21. Can Artificial Intelligence Improve the Readability of Patient Education Materials?
    Kirchner GJ; Kim RY; Weddle JB; Bible JE
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2023 Nov; 481(11):2260-2267. PubMed ID: 37116006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Publication trends in the Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism.
    Kalra S; Baruah M; Unnikrishnan AG; Sahay R
    Indian J Endocrinol Metab; 2011 Jan; 15(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 21584163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Readability of pediatric health materials for preventive dental care.
    Hendrickson RL; Huebner CE; Riedy CA
    BMC Oral Health; 2006 Nov; 6():14. PubMed ID: 17109743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [The legibility of written informed consent forms].
    Simón Lorda P; Barrio Cantalejo IM; Concheiro Carro L
    Med Clin (Barc); 1996 Oct; 107(14):524-9. PubMed ID: 8999210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Bridging the Gap Between Urological Research and Patient Understanding: The Role of Large Language Models in Automated Generation of Layperson's Summaries.
    Eppler MB; Ganjavi C; Knudsen JE; Davis RJ; Ayo-Ajibola O; Desai A; Storino Ramacciotti L; Chen A; De Castro Abreu A; Desai MM; Gill IS; Cacciamani GE
    Urol Pract; 2023 Sep; 10(5):436-443. PubMed ID: 37410015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Forensic scientists' conclusions: how readable are they for non-scientist report-users?
    Howes LM; Kirkbride KP; Kelty SF; Julian R; Kemp N
    Forensic Sci Int; 2013 Sep; 231(1-3):102-12. PubMed ID: 23890623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The Readability and Quality of Web-Based Patient Information on Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Quantitative Content Analysis.
    Tan DJY; Ko TK; Fan KS
    JMIR Form Res; 2023 Nov; 7():e47762. PubMed ID: 38010802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Readability Analysis of Patient-Accessible Information Regarding Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures.
    Lynch CP; Cha EDK; Jenkins NW; Parrish JM; Mohan S; Geoghegan CE; Jadczak CN; Singh K
    Int J Spine Surg; 2021 Oct; 15(5):1046-1053. PubMed ID: 34649950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evaluating the Readability and Quality of Online Patient Education Materials for Pediatric ACL Tears.
    Thomas ND; Mahler R; Rohde M; Segovia N; Shea KG
    J Pediatr Orthop; 2023 Oct; 43(9):549-554. PubMed ID: 37694607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Knee osteotomy: Quality tools and readability data of information on the internet.
    Broderick JM; McCarthy A; Hogan N
    Data Brief; 2021 Feb; 34():106624. PubMed ID: 33354604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A comparative study on the turnaround time of article processing in dermatology journals: A need for improvement of this aspect in Indian journals.
    Manjunath S; Bhattacharjee R; Razmi TM; Narang T; Vinay K
    Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol; 2020; 86(5):526-530. PubMed ID: 32372759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. An analysis of the readability of patient information materials for common urological conditions.
    Dalziel K; Leveridge MJ; Steele SS; Izard JP
    Can Urol Assoc J; 2016; 10(5-6):167-170. PubMed ID: 27713791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Readability of spine-related patient education materials: a standard method for improvement.
    Baumann J; Marshall S; Groneck A; Hanish SJ; Choma T; DeFroda S
    Eur Spine J; 2023 Sep; 32(9):3039-3046. PubMed ID: 37466719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. How readable and quality are online patient education materials about Helicobacter pylori?: Assessment of the readability, quality and reliability.
    Yilmaz Hanci S
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Oct; 102(43):e35543. PubMed ID: 37904459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. International rankings of Diabetes and Metabolic diseases related journals in comparison to other medical journals from India.
    Vaishya R; Misra A
    Diabetes Metab Syndr; 2022 Jul; 16(7):102559. PubMed ID: 35820260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Readability in the British Journal of Surgery.
    Hayden JD
    Br J Surg; 2008 Jan; 95(1):119-24. PubMed ID: 18076017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to mammography for breast cancer screening.
    AlKhalili R; Shukla PA; Patel RH; Sanghvi S; Hubbi B
    Acad Radiol; 2015 Mar; 22(3):290-5. PubMed ID: 25488695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. An objective analysis of quality and readability of online information on COVID-19.
    Wrigley Kelly NE; Murray KE; McCarthy C; O'Shea DB
    Health Technol (Berl); 2021; 11(5):1093-1099. PubMed ID: 34189011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Diabetes in the News: Readability Analysis of Malaysian Diabetes Corpus.
    Hamat A; Jaludin A; Mohd-Dom TN; Rani H; Jamil NA; Abdul Aziz AF
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Jun; 19(11):. PubMed ID: 35682387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Quality and readability of online information on ankylosing spondylitis.
    Kocyigit BF; Koca TT; Akaltun MS
    Clin Rheumatol; 2019 Nov; 38(11):3269-3274. PubMed ID: 31372852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.