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 *

106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25273838)

  • 1. A cost-effectiveness analysis of cell free DNA as a replacement for serum screening for Down syndrome.
    Walker BS; Jackson BR; LaGrave D; Ashwood ER; Schmidt RL
    Prenat Diagn; 2015 May; 35(5):440-6. PubMed ID: 25273838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Maternal cfDNA screening for Down syndrome--a cost sensitivity analysis.
    Cuckle H; Benn P; Pergament E
    Prenat Diagn; 2013 Jul; 33(7):636-42. PubMed ID: 23674341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cost-effectiveness of prenatal screening and diagnostic strategies for Down syndrome: A microsimulation modeling analysis.
    Zhang W; Mohammadi T; Sou J; Anis AH
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(12):e0225281. PubMed ID: 31800591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The consequences of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing in Dutch national health care: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
    Beulen L; Grutters JP; Faas BH; Feenstra I; van Vugt JM; Bekker MN
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2014 Nov; 182():53-61. PubMed ID: 25238658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sequential and contingent prenatal screening for Down syndrome.
    Wald NJ; Rudnicka AR; Bestwick JP
    Prenat Diagn; 2006 Sep; 26(9):769-77. PubMed ID: 16821246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The role of noninvasive prenatal testing as a diagnostic versus a screening tool--a cost-effectiveness analysis.
    Ohno M; Caughey A
    Prenat Diagn; 2013 Jul; 33(7):630-5. PubMed ID: 23674316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. First- and second-trimester evaluation of risk for Down syndrome.
    Ball RH; Caughey AB; Malone FD; Nyberg DA; Comstock CH; Saade GR; Berkowitz RL; Gross SJ; Dugoff L; Craigo SD; Timor-Tritsch IE; Carr SR; Wolfe HM; Emig D; D'Alton ME;
    Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Jul; 110(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 17601890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A cost-effectiveness analysis of prenatal screening strategies for Down syndrome.
    Odibo AO; Stamilio DM; Nelson DB; Sehdev HM; Macones GA
    Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Sep; 106(3):562-8. PubMed ID: 16135588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Prenatal screening costs at a large military treatment facility.
    Shiv E; Sale TJ; Simsiman A; Leininger WM; Lutgendorf MA
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2017 Jul; 30(13):1584-1587. PubMed ID: 27431854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cross-trimester marker ratios in prenatal screening for Down syndrome.
    Wald NJ; Bestwick JP; Morris JK
    Prenat Diagn; 2006 Jun; 26(6):514-23. PubMed ID: 16739232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cell-free DNA for Down syndrome screening in obese women: Is it a cost-effective strategy?
    Hopkins MK; Dugoff L; Durnwald C; Havrilesky LJ; Dotters-Katz S
    Prenat Diagn; 2020 Jan; 40(2):173-178. PubMed ID: 31803969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Prenatal screening for Down syndrome in Australia: costs and benefits of current and novel screening strategies.
    O'Leary P; Maxwell S; Murch A; Hendrie D
    Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2013 Oct; 53(5):425-33. PubMed ID: 24090461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. An outcomes analysis of five prenatal screening strategies for trisomy 21 in women younger than 35 years.
    Biggio JR; Morris TC; Owen J; Stringer JS
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Mar; 190(3):721-9. PubMed ID: 15042005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cost-effectiveness and accuracy of prenatal Down syndrome screening strategies: should the combined test continue to be widely used?
    Gekas J; Durand A; Bujold E; Vallée M; Forest JC; Rousseau F; Reinharz D
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Feb; 204(2):175.e1-8. PubMed ID: 21074138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Optimizing Fetal Aneuploidy Screening in an Austere Military Clinical Environment: A Prenatal Cost Comparison.
    Burrus AD; Shaw-Williams MM; Thagard AS
    Mil Med; 2021 Jan; 186(3-4):e410-e414. PubMed ID: 33181837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The price of performance: a cost and performance analysis of the implementation of cell-free fetal DNA testing for Down syndrome in Ontario, Canada.
    Okun N; Teitelbaum M; Huang T; Dewa CS; Hoch JS
    Prenat Diagn; 2014 Apr; 34(4):350-6. PubMed ID: 24395030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Integrated, sequential, and contingent screening for Down syndrome - local needs should drive methodology.
    Wyatt P
    Prenat Diagn; 2007 Feb; 27(2):186-7. PubMed ID: 17266162
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A tradeoff analysis of risk cutoffs for the quadruple serum screen for Down syndrome.
    Walker B; Ashwood ER; Jackson BR; Lagrave D
    Prenat Diagn; 2013 Dec; 33(12):1201-6. PubMed ID: 24027169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.