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 *

281 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25730134)

  • 1. Ultrasonographic Fetal Weight Estimation: Should Macrosomia-Specific Formulas Be Utilized?
    Porter B; Neely C; Szychowski J; Owen J
    Am J Perinatol; 2015 Aug; 32(10):968-72. PubMed ID: 25730134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Weight estimation for low birth weight fetuses and macrosomic fetuses in Chinese population.
    Chen P; Yu J; Li X; Wang Y; Chang C
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2011 Sep; 284(3):599-606. PubMed ID: 21046133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Ultrasound macrosomic fetal weight estimation formula using maternal weight measurements].
    Murlewska J; Pietryga M; Wender-Ozegowska E
    Ginekol Pol; 2011 Feb; 82(2):114-8. PubMed ID: 21574483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sonographic EFW and macrosomia: is there an optimum formula to predict diabetic fetal macrosomia?
    Combs CA; Rosenn B; Miodovnik M; Siddiqi TA
    J Matern Fetal Med; 2000; 9(1):55-61. PubMed ID: 10757437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Macrosomia: a new formula for optimized fetal weight estimation.
    Hart NC; Hilbert A; Meurer B; Schrauder M; Schmid M; Siemer J; Voigt M; Schild RL
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2010 Jan; 35(1):42-7. PubMed ID: 20034003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Ultrasonographic weight estimation in large for gestational age fetuses: a comparison of 17 sonographic formulas and four models algorithms.
    Rosati P; Arduini M; Giri C; Guariglia L
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2010 Jul; 23(7):675-80. PubMed ID: 19895358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sonographic prediction of macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by maternal diabetes: finding the best formula.
    Shmueli A; Salman L; Hadar E; Aviram A; Bardin R; Ashwal E; Gabbay-Benziv R
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2019 Jan; 299(1):97-103. PubMed ID: 30327863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Different formulas, different thresholds and different performance-the prediction of macrosomia by ultrasound.
    Aviram A; Yogev Y; Ashwal E; Hiersch L; Danon D; Hadar E; Gabbay-Benziv R
    J Perinatol; 2017 Dec; 37(12):1285-1291. PubMed ID: 28906497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Optimized Sonographic Weight Estimation of Fetuses over 3500 g Using Biometry-Guided Formula Selection.
    Balsyte D; Schäffer L; Zimmermann R; Kurmanavicius J; Burkhardt T
    Ultraschall Med; 2017 Jan; 38(1):60-64. PubMed ID: 26422668
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Three-Versus Two-Dimensional Sonographic Biometry for Predicting Birth Weight and Macrosomia in Diabetic Pregnancies.
    Tuuli MG; Kapalka K; Macones GA; Cahill AG
    J Ultrasound Med; 2016 Sep; 35(9):1925-30. PubMed ID: 27466257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Ultrasound diagnosis of fetal macrosomia: a comparison of weight prediction models using computer simulation.
    Mongelli M; Benzie R
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Oct; 26(5):500-3. PubMed ID: 16180258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Finding the best formula to predict the fetal weight: comparison of 18 formulas.
    Esinler D; Bircan O; Esin S; Sahin EG; Kandemir O; Yalvac S
    Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2015; 80(2):78-84. PubMed ID: 26183256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Fetal weight estimation in gestational diabetic pregnancies: comparison between conventional and three-dimensional fractional thigh volume methods using gestation-adjusted projection.
    Pagani G; Palai N; Zatti S; Fratelli N; Prefumo F; Frusca T
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Jan; 43(1):72-6. PubMed ID: 23494762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Incorporating sonographic cheek-to-cheek diameter, biparietal diameter and abdominal circumference improves weight estimation in the macrosomic fetus.
    Abramowicz JS; Robischon K; Cox C
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 1997 Jun; 9(6):409-13. PubMed ID: 9239827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Estimators of birth weight in pregnant women requiring insulin: a comparison of seven sonographic models.
    McLaren RA; Puckett JL; Chauhan SP
    Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Apr; 85(4):565-9. PubMed ID: 7898834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fetal weight estimation in extreme macrosomia (≥ 4,500 g): comparison of 10 formulas.
    Faschingbauer F; Voigt F; Goecke TW; Siemer J; Beckmann MW; Yazdi B; Schild RL
    Ultraschall Med; 2012 Dec; 33(7):E62-E67. PubMed ID: 22179801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Diagnostic accuracy of modified Hadlock formula for fetal macrosomia in women with gestational diabetes and pregnancy weight gain above recommended.
    Lovrić B; Šijanović S; Lešin J; Juras J
    J Perinat Med; 2021 Sep; 49(7):907-914. PubMed ID: 33861027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Disadvantages of a weight estimation formula for macrosomic fetuses: the Hart formula from a clinical perspective.
    Weiss C; Oppelt P; Mayer RB
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2018 Dec; 298(6):1101-1106. PubMed ID: 30284620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Prediction of fetal macrosomia using two-dimensional and three-dimensional ultrasound.
    Mazzone E; Dall'Asta A; Kiener AJO; Carpano MG; Suprani A; Ghi T; Frusca T
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2019 Dec; 243():26-31. PubMed ID: 31670065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of sonographic estimation of fetal weight before induction of labor in diabetic pregnancies and pregnancies with suspected fetal macrosomia.
    Ben-Haroush A; Yogev Y; Mashiach R; Hod M; Meisner I
    J Perinat Med; 2003; 31(3):225-30. PubMed ID: 12825478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.