BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

315 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27158767)

  • 1. Scientific basis for standardization of fetal head measurements by ultrasound: a reproducibility study.
    Napolitano R; Donadono V; Ohuma EO; Knight CL; Wanyonyi SZ; Kemp B; Norris T; Papageorghiou AT
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Jul; 48(1):80-5. PubMed ID: 27158767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quality control of ultrasound for fetal biometry: results from the INTERGROWTH-21
    Cavallaro A; Ash ST; Napolitano R; Wanyonyi S; Ohuma EO; Molloholli M; Sande J; Sarris I; Ioannou C; Norris T; Donadono V; Carvalho M; Purwar M; Barros FC; Jaffer YA; Bertino E; Pang R; Gravett MG; Salomon LJ; Noble JA; Altman DG; Papageorghiou AT
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Sep; 52(3):332-339. PubMed ID: 28718938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Biparietal diameter measurements using the outer-to-outer versus outer-to-inner measurement: A question of pedantry?
    Wong L; Paul E; Murday HK; Fang J; Lavender I; Coombs PR; Teoh M
    Australas J Ultrasound Med; 2018 Aug; 21(3):161-168. PubMed ID: 34760517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Use of focus point for plane acquisition to improve reproducibility in fetal biometry.
    Vignola S; Donadono V; Cavalli C; Azzaretto V; Casagrandi D; Pandya P; Napolitano R
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2024 Feb; 63(2):237-242. PubMed ID: 37519218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Ultrasound-based gestational-age estimation in late pregnancy.
    Papageorghiou AT; Kemp B; Stones W; Ohuma EO; Kennedy SH; Purwar M; Salomon LJ; Altman DG; Noble JA; Bertino E; Gravett MG; Pang R; Cheikh Ismail L; Barros FC; Lambert A; Jaffer YA; Victora CG; Bhutta ZA; Villar J;
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Dec; 48(6):719-726. PubMed ID: 26924421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Artificial intelligence assistance for fetal head biometry: Assessment of automated measurement software.
    Ambroise Grandjean G; Hossu G; Bertholdt C; Noble P; Morel O; Grangé G
    Diagn Interv Imaging; 2018 Nov; 99(11):709-716. PubMed ID: 30177447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Volumetric (3D) imaging reduces inter- and intraobserver variation of fetal biometry measurements.
    Chan LW; Fung TY; Leung TY; Sahota DS; Lau TK
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Apr; 33(4):447-52. PubMed ID: 19277977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of fetal biometry.
    Perni SC; Chervenak FA; Kalish RB; Magherini-Rothe S; Predanic M; Streltzoff J; Skupski DW
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Nov; 24(6):654-8. PubMed ID: 15476300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility study of early fetal growth parameters.
    Verburg BO; Mulder PG; Hofman A; Jaddoe VW; Witteman JC; Steegers EA
    Prenat Diagn; 2008 Apr; 28(4):323-31. PubMed ID: 18324617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Fetal biometry by an inexperienced operator using two- and three-dimensional ultrasound.
    Yang F; Leung KY; Lee YP; Chan HY; Tang MH
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2010 May; 35(5):566-71. PubMed ID: 20183864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. International estimated fetal weight standards of the INTERGROWTH-21
    Stirnemann J; Villar J; Salomon LJ; Ohuma E; Ruyan P; Altman DG; Nosten F; Craik R; Munim S; Cheikh Ismail L; Barros FC; Lambert A; Norris S; Carvalho M; Jaffer YA; Noble JA; Bertino E; Gravett MG; Purwar M; Victora CG; Uauy R; Bhutta Z; Kennedy S; Papageorghiou AT; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Apr; 49(4):478-486. PubMed ID: 27804212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An investigation of the standardization of fetal cavum septi pellucidi measurements using three-dimensional volumes of the fetal head.
    Zhao D; Cai A; Wang B
    J Clin Ultrasound; 2019 Jul; 47(6):331-338. PubMed ID: 30957238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Finding the most accurate method to measure head circumference for fetal weight estimation.
    Schmidt U; Temerinac D; Bildstein K; Tuschy B; Mayer J; Sütterlin M; Siemer J; Kehl S
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2014 Jul; 178():153-6. PubMed ID: 24802187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measurement error for ultrasound fetal biometry performed by paramedics in rural Bangladesh.
    Neufeld LM; Wagatsuma Y; Hussain R; Begum M; Frongillo EA
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Oct; 34(4):387-94. PubMed ID: 19504627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Discrepancy of ultrasound biometric parameters of the head (HC--head circumference, BPD--biparietal diameter) and femur length in relation to sex of the fetus and duration of pregnancy].
    L'ubuský M; Mícková I; Procházka M; Dzvincuk P; Malá K; Cízek L; Janout V
    Ceska Gynekol; 2006 May; 71(3):169-72. PubMed ID: 16768041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of maternal body mass index on interobserver variability of fetal ultrasound biometry and amniotic-fluid assessment in late pregnancy.
    Martins JG; Kawakita T; Gurganus M; Baraki D; Jain P; Papageorghiou AT; Abuhamad AZ
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Dec; 58(6):892-899. PubMed ID: 33836119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Intra- and interobserver variability in fetal ultrasound measurements.
    Sarris I; Ioannou C; Chamberlain P; Ohuma E; Roseman F; Hoch L; Altman DG; Papageorghiou AT;
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Mar; 39(3):266-73. PubMed ID: 22535628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The feasibility of using 5D CNS software in obtaining standard fetal head measurements from volumes acquired by three-dimensional ultrasonography: comparison with two-dimensional ultrasound.
    Rizzo G; Aiello E; Pietrolucci ME; Arduini D
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2016; 29(14):2217-22. PubMed ID: 26364724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fetal biometry: how well can offline measurements from three-dimensional volumes substitute real-time two-dimensional measurements?
    Sarris I; Ohuma E; Ioannou C; Sande J; Altman DG; Papageorghiou AT;
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Nov; 42(5):560-70. PubMed ID: 23335102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of automated tool for two-dimensional fetal biometry.
    Salim I; Cavallaro A; Ciofolo-Veit C; Rouet L; Raynaud C; Mory B; Collet Billon A; Harrison G; Roundhill D; Papageorghiou AT
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Nov; 54(5):650-654. PubMed ID: 30478919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.