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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25570881)

  • 1. Non-invasive electrohysterogram recording using flexible concentric ring electrode.
    Ye-Lin Y; Alberola-Rubio J; Prats-Boluda G; Bueno Barrachina JM; Perales A; Valero J; Desantes D; Garcia-Casado J
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2014; 2014():4050-3. PubMed ID: 25570881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Feasibility and analysis of bipolar concentric recording of electrohysterogram with flexible active electrode.
    Ye-Lin Y; Alberola-Rubio J; Prats-Boluda G; Perales A; Desantes D; Garcia-Casado J
    Ann Biomed Eng; 2015 Apr; 43(4):968-76. PubMed ID: 25274161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Prediction of labor using non-invasive Laplacian EHG recordings.
    Ye-Lin Y; Prats-Boluda G; Alberola-Rubio J; Bueno Barrachina JM; Perales A; Garcia-Casado J
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2013; 2013():7428-31. PubMed ID: 24111462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of non-invasive electrohysterographic recording techniques for monitoring uterine dynamics.
    Alberola-Rubio J; Prats-Boluda G; Ye-Lin Y; Valero J; Perales A; Garcia-Casado J
    Med Eng Phys; 2013 Dec; 35(12):1736-43. PubMed ID: 23958388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Automated electrohysterographic detection of uterine contractions for monitoring of pregnancy: feasibility and prospects.
    Muszynski C; Happillon T; Azudin K; Tylcz JB; Istrate D; Marque C
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2018 May; 18(1):136. PubMed ID: 29739438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of electrohysterogram signal measured by surface electrodes with different designs: A computational study with dipole band and abdomen models.
    Gao P; Hao D; An Y; Wang Y; Qiu Q; Yang L; Yang Y; Zhang S; Li X; Zheng D
    Sci Rep; 2017 Dec; 7(1):17282. PubMed ID: 29229922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Recording of electrohysterogram laplacian potential.
    Alberola-Rubio J; Garcia-Casado J; Ye-Lin Y; Prats-Boluda G; Perales A
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2011; 2011():2510-3. PubMed ID: 22254851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Estimation of 8-Electrode Configuration for Recognition of Uterine Contraction with Electrohysterogram.
    Hao D; Qiao X; Song X; Wang Y; Qiu Q; Jiang H; Chen F
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2019 Jul; 2019():672-675. PubMed ID: 31945987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Development of Electrohysterogram Recording System for Monitoring Uterine Contraction.
    Hao D; An Y; Qiao X; Qiu Q; Zhou X; Peng J
    J Healthc Eng; 2019; 2019():4230157. PubMed ID: 31354930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Acquisition and Analysis of Electrohysterogram Signal.
    R P; S SD
    J Med Syst; 2020 Feb; 44(3):66. PubMed ID: 32040634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Electrohysterography during pregnancy: preliminary report.
    Gondry J; Marque C; Duchene J; Cabrol D
    Biomed Instrum Technol; 1993; 27(4):318-24. PubMed ID: 8369867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Prediction of labor onset type: Spontaneous vs induced; role of electrohysterography?
    Alberola-Rubio J; Garcia-Casado J; Prats-Boluda G; Ye-Lin Y; Desantes D; Valero J; Perales A
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2017 Jun; 144():127-133. PubMed ID: 28494996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Automatic recognition of uterine contractions with electrohysterogram signals based on the zero-crossing rate.
    Song X; Qiao X; Hao D; Yang L; Zhou X; Xu Y; Zheng D
    Sci Rep; 2021 Jan; 11(1):1956. PubMed ID: 33479344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Icelandic 16-electrode electrohysterogram database.
    Alexandersson A; Steingrimsdottir T; Terrien J; Marque C; Karlsson B
    Sci Data; 2015; 2():150017. PubMed ID: 25984349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Relationship between electrohysterogram and internal uterine pressure: a preliminary study.
    Rabotti C; Mischi M; van Laar JO; Aelen P; Oei SG; Bergmans JW
    Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2006; 2006():1661-4. PubMed ID: 17946058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Performance comparison of coupling-evaluation methods in discriminating between pregnancy and labor EHG signals.
    Diab A; Boudaoud S; Karlsson B; Marque C
    Comput Biol Med; 2021 May; 132():104308. PubMed ID: 33711558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Characterization and automatic classification of preterm and term uterine records.
    Jager F; Libenšek S; Geršak K
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0202125. PubMed ID: 30153264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Regional identification of information flow termination of electrohysterographic signals: Towards understanding human uterine electrical propagation.
    Xu Y; Hao D; Taggart MJ; Zheng D
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2022 Aug; 223():106967. PubMed ID: 35763875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Uterine slow wave: directionality and changes with imminent delivery.
    Albaladejo-Belmonte M; Prats-Boluda G; Ye-Lin Y; Garfield RE; Garcia-Casado J
    Physiol Meas; 2022 Aug; 43(8):. PubMed ID: 35896091
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Recognition of uterine contractions with electrohysterogram and exploring the best electrode combination.
    Du M; Qiu Q; Hao D; Zhou X; Yang L; Liu X
    Technol Health Care; 2022; 30(S1):235-242. PubMed ID: 35124600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.