186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24391108)
1. Exponentially weighted moving average chart as a suitable tool for nuchal translucency quality review.
Hynek M; Smetanová D; Stejskal D; Zvárová J
Prenat Diagn; 2014 Apr; 34(4):367-76. PubMed ID: 24391108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Real-time quality control of nuchal translucency measurements using the exponentially weighted moving average chart.
Hynek M; Zvárová J; Smetanová D; Stejskal D; Kalina J
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Jan; 60(1):84-89. PubMed ID: 33495014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Continuous independent quality control for fetal nuchal translucency measurements provided by the cumulative summation technique.
Balsyte D; Schäffer L; Burkhardt T; Wisser J; Krafft A; Kurmanavicius J
Ultraschall Med; 2011 Dec; 32 Suppl 2():E141-6. PubMed ID: 21877321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Quality assurance of nuchal translucency for prenatal fetal Down syndrome screening.
Sahota DS; Leung WC; To WK; Chan WP; Lau TK; Leung TY
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2012 Jul; 25(7):1039-43. PubMed ID: 21854135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The CUSUM test applied in prospective nuchal translucency quality review.
Sabrià J; Barceló-Vidal C; Arigita M; Jimenez JM; Puerto B; Borrell A
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2011 May; 37(5):582-7. PubMed ID: 21520314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Nuchal Translucency Quality Review (NTQR) program: first one and half million results.
Cuckle H; Platt LD; Thornburg LL; Bromley B; Fuchs K; Abuhamad A; Benacerraf B; Copel JA; Depp R; D'Alton M; Goldberg J; O'Keeffe D; Spitz J; Toland G; Wapner R;
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Feb; 45(2):199-204. PubMed ID: 24753079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Quality of nuchal translucency measurements in The Netherlands: a quantitative analysis.
Koster MP; Wortelboer EJ; Engels MA; Stoutenbeek PH; Elvers LH; Visser GH; Schielen PC
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Aug; 34(2):136-41. PubMed ID: 19562664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Nuchal translucency thickness at 11-14 weeks of gestation: French charts and equations].
Salomon LJ; Chalouhi GE; Bernard JP; Ville Y;
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2009 Dec; 38(8):635-41. PubMed ID: 19854002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Audit on nuchal translucency thickness measurements in Flanders, Belgium: a plea for methodological standardization.
Gyselaers WJ; Vereecken AJ; Van Herck EJ; Straetmans DP; de Jonge ET; Ombelet WU; Nijhuis JG
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Oct; 24(5):511-5. PubMed ID: 15459938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of nuchal translucency credentialing by the FMF, the NTQR or both on screening distributions and performance.
Evans MI; Krantz DA; Hallahan TW; Sherwin J
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Feb; 39(2):181-4. PubMed ID: 21484907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analysis of quality of nuchal translucency measurements: its role in prenatal diagnosis.
Gabriel CC; Echevarria M; Rodríguez I; Serra B
ScientificWorldJournal; 2012; 2012():482832. PubMed ID: 22649294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality assessment of routine nuchal translucency measurements: a North American laboratory perspective.
Palomaki GE; Neveux LM; Donnenfeld A; Lee JE; McDowell G; Canick JA; Summers A; Lambert-Messerlian G; Kellner LH; Zebelman A; Haddow JE
Genet Med; 2008 Feb; 10(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 18281921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. United States' experience in nuchal translucency measurement: variation according to provider characteristics in over five million ultrasound examinations.
Thornburg LL; Bromley B; Dugoff L; Platt LD; Fuchs KM; Norton ME; McIntosh J; Toland GJ; Cuckle H;
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Nov; 58(5):732-737. PubMed ID: 33634915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Quality of nuchal transluccency measurements: an exploratory study into their performance and evaluation].
van den Berg M; Kleinveld JH; Sander MJ; van Vugt JM; Timmermans DR
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2005 Jul; 149(30):1691-6. PubMed ID: 16104116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Nuchal translucency measurement: are qualitative and quantitative quality control processes related?
Hermann M; Fries N; Mangione R; Boukobza P; Ville Y; Salomon LJ
Prenat Diagn; 2013 Aug; 33(8):770-4. PubMed ID: 23613188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Exponentially weighted moving average charts to compare observed and expected values for monitoring risk-adjusted hospital indicators.
Cook DA; Coory M; Webster RA
BMJ Qual Saf; 2011 Jun; 20(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 21209145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Education and quality review for nuchal translucency ultrasound.
D'Alton ME; Cleary-Goldman J
Semin Perinatol; 2005 Dec; 29(6):380-5. PubMed ID: 16533651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The value of repeated evaluation after initial failed nuchal translucency measurement.
Wax JR; Pinette MG; Cartin A; Blackstone J
J Ultrasound Med; 2007 Jun; 26(6):825-8; quiz 829-30. PubMed ID: 17526614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Exponentially weighted moving average-Moving average charts for monitoring the process mean.
Sukparungsee S; Areepong Y; Taboran R
PLoS One; 2020; 15(2):e0228208. PubMed ID: 32059001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Do clinical practitioners seeking credentialing for nuchal translucency measurement demonstrate compliance with biosafety recommendations? Experience of the Nuchal Translucency Quality Review Program.
Bromley B; Spitz J; Fuchs K; Thornburg LL
J Ultrasound Med; 2014 Jul; 33(7):1209-14. PubMed ID: 24958407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
