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 *

931 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24583736)

  • 1. Cauda equina syndrome: assessing the readability and quality of patient information on the Internet.
    O'Neill SC; Baker JF; Fitzgerald C; Fleming C; Rowan F; Byrne D; Synnott K
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 May; 39(10):E645-9. PubMed ID: 24583736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Readability and quality assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to deep vein thrombosis.
    Qadeer MA; Kelly M; Lenehan B
    Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis; 2022 Jan; 33(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 34799504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure: an assessment of the quality and readability of online information.
    Lim SJM; Kelly M; Selvarajah L; Murray M; Scanlon T
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2021 May; 21(1):149. PubMed ID: 33952225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing the Quality and Readability of Online Resources for Plantar Fasciitis.
    Lim ST; Kelly M; O'Neill S; D'Souza L
    J Foot Ankle Surg; 2021; 60(6):1175-1178. PubMed ID: 34092460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluating the Quality and Readability of Internet Information on Meningiomas.
    Saeed F; Anderson I
    World Neurosurg; 2017 Jan; 97():312-316. PubMed ID: 27742505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An assessment of the readability and quality of elective orthopaedic information on the Internet.
    O'Neill SC; Nagle M; Baker JF; Rowan FE; Tierney S; Quinlan JF
    Acta Orthop Belg; 2014 Jun; 80(2):153-60. PubMed ID: 25090785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Quality and readability of online patient information for abdominal aortic aneurysms.
    Bailey MA; Coughlin PA; Sohrabi S; Griffin KJ; Rashid ST; Troxler MA; Scott DJ
    J Vasc Surg; 2012 Jul; 56(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 22521801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Internet search term affects the quality and accuracy of online information about developmental hip dysplasia.
    Fabricant PD; Dy CJ; Patel RM; Blanco JS; Doyle SM
    J Pediatr Orthop; 2013 Jun; 33(4):361-5. PubMed ID: 23653022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluating the quality and readability of thyroplasty information on the Internet.
    Ting K; Hu A
    J Voice; 2014 May; 28(3):378-81. PubMed ID: 24314830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The quality of mental health information commonly searched for on the Internet.
    Grohol JM; Slimowicz J; Granda R
    Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw; 2014 Apr; 17(4):216-21. PubMed ID: 24237287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of online patient education materials from major ophthalmologic associations.
    Huang G; Fang CH; Agarwal N; Bhagat N; Eloy JA; Langer PD
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2015 Apr; 133(4):449-54. PubMed ID: 25654639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Myelomeningocele information on the internet is accessible and of variable quality, and requires a high reading level.
    Bergman J; Konijeti R; Lerman SE
    J Urol; 2007 Mar; 177(3):1138-42. PubMed ID: 17296433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Readability of spine-related patient education materials from subspecialty organization and spine practitioner websites.
    Vives M; Young L; Sabharwal S
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Dec; 34(25):2826-31. PubMed ID: 19910867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Readability assessment of internet-based consumer health information.
    Walsh TM; Volsko TA
    Respir Care; 2008 Oct; 53(10):1310-5. PubMed ID: 18811992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Breast reconstruction post mastectomy- Let's Google it. Accessibility, readability and quality of online information.
    Lynch NP; Lang B; Angelov S; McGarrigle SA; Boyle TJ; Al-Azawi D; Connolly EM
    Breast; 2017 Apr; 32():126-129. PubMed ID: 28178606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of search term on the quality and accuracy of online information regarding distal radius fractures.
    Dy CJ; Taylor SA; Patel RM; Kitay A; Roberts TR; Daluiski A
    J Hand Surg Am; 2012 Sep; 37(9):1881-7. PubMed ID: 22857909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluating the Quality, Content, and Readability of Online Resources for Failed Back Spinal Surgery.
    Guo WJ; Wang WK; Xu D; Qiao Z; Shi YL; Luo P
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2019 Apr; 44(7):494-502. PubMed ID: 30234809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Patient-orientated web sites on laryngectomy: is their information readable?
    Pothier L; Pothier DD
    Eur J Cancer Care (Engl); 2009 Nov; 18(6):594-7. PubMed ID: 19549174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Readability assessment of internet-based patient education materials related to uterine artery embolization.
    Shukla P; Sanghvi SP; Lelkes VM; Kumar A; Contractor S
    J Vasc Interv Radiol; 2013 Apr; 24(4):469-74. PubMed ID: 23452554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The quality and readability of colorectal cancer information on the internet.
    Grewal P; Alagaratnam S
    Int J Surg; 2013; 11(5):410-3. PubMed ID: 23523948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 47.