98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2499989)
1. [Ultrasound screening in pregnancy--a critical analysis of the literature].
Köck C
Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1989 May; 101(10):341-5. PubMed ID: 2499989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [The value of prenatal ultrasound screening exemplified by abnormalities of the urogenital system. Data from the Styrian malformation register 1985 to 1987].
Häusler M; Hofmann HM; Schaffer M; Hofer P; Rollett H; Ring E; Ipsiroglu OS
Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1989 May; 101(10):346-50. PubMed ID: 2660419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Routine prenatal screening policy of fetal malformations by both maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein and ultrasound in eastern Hungary.
Szabó M; Tóth Z; Török O; Veress L; Bede E; Nagy E; Papp Z
Acta Chir Hung; 1989; 30(4):291-8. PubMed ID: 2484200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Cost-benefit analysis of screening for congenital toxoplasmosis].
Sagmeister M; Gessner U; Kind C; Horisberger B
Schweiz Med Wochenschr Suppl; 1995; 65():103S-112S. PubMed ID: 7716447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Cost-benefit analysis of prenatal screening for trisomy 21 through analysis of HCG in maternal blood].
Seror V; Moatti JP; Muller F; Le Galès C; Boué A
Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 1993; 41(1):3-15. PubMed ID: 8465062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Pregnancy and neonatal screening in Austria].
Stöckler S; Ipsiroglu OS; Häusler M
Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1989 Sep; 101(16):527-9. PubMed ID: 2678759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cost-effectiveness analysis of prenatal diagnosis intervention for Down's syndrome in China.
Chen Y; Qian X; Li J; Zhang J; Chu A; Schweitzer SO
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(1):138-45. PubMed ID: 17234028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cost-effectiveness of antenatal screening for neonatal alloimmune thrombocytopenia.
Killie MK; Kjeldsen-Kragh J; Husebekk A; Skogen B; Olsen JA; Kristiansen IS
BJOG; 2007 May; 114(5):588-95. PubMed ID: 17355359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The cost-effectiveness of universal screening in pregnancy for subclinical hypothyroidism.
Thung SF; Funai EF; Grobman WA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Mar; 200(3):267.e1-7. PubMed ID: 19114278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Economic evaluation of HIV screening in pregnant women attending antenatal clinics in India.
Kumar M; Birch S; Maturana A; Gafni A
Health Policy; 2006 Jul; 77(2):233-43. PubMed ID: 16126300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cost-effectiveness of Down syndrome screening paradigms.
Caughey AB; Kaimal AJ; Odibo AO
Clin Lab Med; 2010 Sep; 30(3):629-42. PubMed ID: 20638577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Fetal Down syndrome screening: a cost effectiveness analysis of alternative screening programs.
Cusick W; Vintzileos AM
J Matern Fetal Med; 1999; 8(6):243-8. PubMed ID: 10582856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Antenatal herpes serologic screening: an appraisal of the evidence.
Tita AT; Grobman WA; Rouse DJ
Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Nov; 108(5):1247-53. PubMed ID: 17077252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Improved prenatal diagnostic possibilities for congenital abnormalities and chromosomal disorders. Advantages and disadvantages of screening and diagnostic methods].
Nørgaard-Pedersen B; Larsen SO; Larsen JF
Ugeskr Laeger; 1996 Feb; 158(9):1201-7. PubMed ID: 8644423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Routine hepatitis C virus screening in pregnancy: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Plunkett BA; Grobman WA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Apr; 192(4):1153-61. PubMed ID: 15846195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Economic modelling of antenatal screening and ultrasound scanning programmes for identification of fetal abnormalities.
Ritchie K; Bradbury I; Slattery J; Wright D; Iqbal K; Penney G
BJOG; 2005 Jul; 112(7):866-74. PubMed ID: 15957985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Prevention of congenital toxoplasmosis in Europe].
Raeber PA; Biedermann K; Just M; Zuber P
Schweiz Med Wochenschr Suppl; 1995; 65():96S-102S. PubMed ID: 7716459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Should all pregnant women be offered an ultrasound examination?
de Crespigny LC; Warren P; Buttery B
Med J Aust; 1989 Dec 4-18; 151(11-12):613-5. PubMed ID: 2512470
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Economic evaluation of prenatal carrier screening for fragile X syndrome.
Vintzileos AM; Ananth CV; Fisher AJ; Smulian JC; Day-Salvatore D; Beazoglou T; Knuppel RA
J Matern Fetal Med; 1999; 8(4):168-72. PubMed ID: 10406300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cost-effectiveness analysis of prenatal diagnosis: methodological issues and concerns.
Caughey AB
Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2005; 60(1):11-8. PubMed ID: 15692215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
