BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

581 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27173131)

  • 1. Caesarean section rates and adverse neonatal outcomes after induction of labour versus expectant management in women with an unripe cervix: a secondary analysis of the HYPITAT and DIGITAT trials.
    Bernardes TP; Broekhuijsen K; Koopmans CM; Boers KE; van Wyk L; Tajik P; van Pampus MG; Scherjon SA; Mol BW; Franssen MT; van den Berg PP; Groen H
    BJOG; 2016 Aug; 123(9):1501-8. PubMed ID: 27173131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Which intrauterine growth restricted fetuses at term benefit from early labour induction? A secondary analysis of the DIGITAT randomised trial.
    Tajik P; van Wyk L; Boers KE; le Cessie S; Zafarmand MH; Roumen F; van der Post JA; Porath M; van Pampus MG; Spaanderdam ME; Kwee A; Duvekot JJ; Bremer HA; Delemarre FM; Bloemenkamp KW; de Groot CJ; Willekes C; van Lith JM; Bossuyt PM; Mol BW; Scherjon SA;
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2014 Jan; 172():20-5. PubMed ID: 24192662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial.
    Keulen JK; Bruinsma A; Kortekaas JC; van Dillen J; Bossuyt PM; Oudijk MA; Duijnhoven RG; van Kaam AH; Vandenbussche FP; van der Post JA; Mol BW; de Miranda E
    BMJ; 2019 Feb; 364():l344. PubMed ID: 30786997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Methods for assessing pre-induction cervical ripening.
    Ezebialu IU; Eke AC; Eleje GU; Nwachukwu CE
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2015 Jun; 2015(6):CD010762. PubMed ID: 26068943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Re: Caesarean section rates and adverse neonatal outcomes after induction of labour versus expectant management in women with an unripe cervix: a secondary analysis of the HYPITAT and DIGITAT trials: Local cervical ripening, induction of labour, and caesarean section rate.
    Carbillon L
    BJOG; 2017 May; 124(6):982-983. PubMed ID: 28429437
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Induction versus expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction at term: randomised equivalence trial (DIGITAT).
    Boers KE; Vijgen SM; Bijlenga D; van der Post JA; Bekedam DJ; Kwee A; van der Salm PC; van Pampus MG; Spaanderman ME; de Boer K; Duvekot JJ; Bremer HA; Hasaart TH; Delemarre FM; Bloemenkamp KW; van Meir CA; Willekes C; Wijnen EJ; Rijken M; le Cessie S; Roumen FJ; Thornton JG; van Lith JM; Mol BW; Scherjon SA;
    BMJ; 2010 Dec; 341():c7087. PubMed ID: 21177352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Should cervical favourability play a role in the decision for labour induction in gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia at term? An exploratory analysis of the HYPITAT trial.
    Tajik P; van der Tuuk K; Koopmans CM; Groen H; van Pampus MG; van der Berg PP; van der Post JA; van Loon AJ; de Groot CJ; Kwee A; Huisjes AJ; van Beek E; Papatsonis DN; Bloemenkamp KW; van Unnik GA; Porath M; Rijnders RJ; Stigter RH; de Boer K; Scheepers HC; Zwinderman AH; Bossuyt PM; Mol BW
    BJOG; 2012 Aug; 119(9):1123-30. PubMed ID: 22703475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring for gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia between 34 and 37 weeks' gestation (HYPITAT-II): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial.
    Langenveld J; Broekhuijsen K; van Baaren GJ; van Pampus MG; van Kaam AH; Groen H; Porath M; Oudijk MA; Bloemenkamp KW; Groot CJ; van Beek E; van Huizen ME; Oosterbaan HP; Willekes C; Wijnen-Duvekot EJ; Franssen MT; Perquin DA; Sporken JM; Woiski MD; Bremer HA; Papatsonis DN; Brons JT; Kaplan M; Nij Bijvanck BW; Mol BW;
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2011 Jul; 11():50. PubMed ID: 21736705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial.
    Wennerholm UB; Saltvedt S; Wessberg A; Alkmark M; Bergh C; Wendel SB; Fadl H; Jonsson M; Ladfors L; Sengpiel V; Wesström J; Wennergren G; Wikström AK; Elden H; Stephansson O; Hagberg H
    BMJ; 2019 Nov; 367():l6131. PubMed ID: 31748223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Authors' reply re: Caesarean section rates and adverse neonatal outcomes after induction of labour versus expectant management in women with an unripe cervix: a secondary analysis of the HYPITAT and DIGITAT trials.
    Bernardes T; Groen H;
    BJOG; 2017 May; 124(6):983-984. PubMed ID: 28429434
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.
    Gülmezoglu AM; Crowther CA; Middleton P; Heatley E
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2012 Jun; 6(6):CD004945. PubMed ID: 22696345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring in women with pregnancy induced hypertension or mild preeclampsia at term: the HYPITAT trial.
    Koopmans CM; Bijlenga D; Aarnoudse JG; van Beek E; Bekedam DJ; van den Berg PP; Burggraaff JM; Birnie E; Bloemenkamp KW; Drogtrop AP; Franx A; de Groot CJ; Huisjes AJ; Kwee A; le Cessie S; van Loon AJ; Mol BW; van der Post JA; Roumen FJ; Scheepers HC; Spaanderman ME; Stigter RH; Willekes C; van Pampus MG
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2007 Jul; 7():14. PubMed ID: 17662114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Economic analysis comparing induction of labour and expectant management for intrauterine growth restriction at term (DIGITAT trial).
    Vijgen SM; Boers KE; Opmeer BC; Bijlenga D; Bekedam DJ; Bloemenkamp KW; de Boer K; Bremer HA; le Cessie S; Delemarre FM; Duvekot JJ; Hasaart TH; Kwee A; van Lith JM; van Meir CA; van Pampus MG; van der Post JA; Rijken M; Roumen FJ; van der Salm PC; Spaanderman ME; Willekes C; Wijnen EJ; Mol BW; Scherjon SA
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2013 Oct; 170(2):358-63. PubMed ID: 23910171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Timing induction of labour at 41 or 42 weeks? A closer look at time frames of comparison: A review.
    Keulen JKJ; Bruinsma A; Kortekaas JC; van Dillen J; van der Post JAM; de Miranda E
    Midwifery; 2018 Nov; 66():111-118. PubMed ID: 30170263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predictors of newborn admission after labour induction at term: Bishop score, pre-induction ultrasonography and clinical risk factors.
    Tan PC; Suguna S; Vallikkannu N; Hassan J
    Singapore Med J; 2008 Mar; 49(3):193-8. PubMed ID: 18362999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. CONDISOX- continued versus discontinued oxytocin stimulation of induced labour in a double-blind randomised controlled trial.
    Boie S; Glavind J; Uldbjerg N; Bakker JJH; van der Post JAM; Steer PJ; Bor P
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2019 Sep; 19(1):320. PubMed ID: 31477047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Immediate delivery versus expectant monitoring for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation (HYPITAT-II): an open-label, randomised controlled trial.
    Broekhuijsen K; van Baaren GJ; van Pampus MG; Ganzevoort W; Sikkema JM; Woiski MD; Oudijk MA; Bloemenkamp KW; Scheepers HC; Bremer HA; Rijnders RJ; van Loon AJ; Perquin DA; Sporken JM; Papatsonis DN; van Huizen ME; Vredevoogd CB; Brons JT; Kaplan M; van Kaam AH; Groen H; Porath MM; van den Berg PP; Mol BW; Franssen MT; Langenveld J;
    Lancet; 2015 Jun; 385(9986):2492-501. PubMed ID: 25817374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Induction of labour for suspected macrosomia at term in non-diabetic women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Magro-Malosso ER; Saccone G; Chen M; Navathe R; Di Tommaso M; Berghella V
    BJOG; 2017 Feb; 124(3):414-421. PubMed ID: 27921380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The impact of fetal growth restriction on latency in the setting of expectant management of preeclampsia.
    McKinney D; Boyd H; Langager A; Oswald M; Pfister A; Warshak CR
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Mar; 214(3):395.e1-7. PubMed ID: 26767794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study.
    Stock SJ; Ferguson E; Duffy A; Ford I; Chalmers J; Norman JE
    BMJ; 2012 May; 344():e2838. PubMed ID: 22577197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.