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.
98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31136684)
21. Access to fertility services in Canada for HIV-positive individuals and couples: a comparison between 2007 and 2014. Lo CK; Kennedy VL; Yudin MH; Shapiro HM; Loutfy M AIDS Care; 2017 Nov; 29(11):1433-1436. PubMed ID: 28553759 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Access to assisted reproductive technology centers in the United States. Nangia AK; Likosky DS; Wang D Fertil Steril; 2010 Feb; 93(3):745-61. PubMed ID: 19081563 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The relative contribution of assisted reproductive technologies and ovulation induction to multiple births in the United States 5 years after the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology/American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommendation to limit the number of embryos transferred. Dickey RP Fertil Steril; 2007 Dec; 88(6):1554-61. PubMed ID: 17481621 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Quality of information about success rates provided on assisted reproductive technology clinic websites in Australia and New Zealand. Hammarberg K; Prentice T; Purcell I; Johnson L Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2018 Jun; 58(3):330-334. PubMed ID: 29131305 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Accuracy of assisted reproductive technology information on birth certificates: Florida and Massachusetts, 2004-06. Cohen B; Bernson D; Sappenfield W; Kirby RS; Kissin D; Zhang Y; Copeland G; Zhang Z; Macaluso M; Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2014 May; 28(3):181-90. PubMed ID: 24533655 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The effects of competition on assisted reproductive technology outcomes. Henne MB; Bundorf MK Fertil Steril; 2010 Apr; 93(6):1820-30. PubMed ID: 18442821 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?: challenges in measuring and reporting success rates for assisted reproductive technology treatments: what is optimal? Schieve LA; Reynolds MA Hum Reprod; 2004 Apr; 19(4):778-82. PubMed ID: 15033946 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The impact of consumer affordability on access to assisted reproductive technologies and embryo transfer practices: an international analysis. Chambers GM; Hoang VP; Sullivan EA; Chapman MG; Ishihara O; Zegers-Hochschild F; Nygren KG; Adamson GD Fertil Steril; 2014 Jan; 101(1):191-198.e4. PubMed ID: 24156958 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Accuracy of assisted reproductive technology information on the Massachusetts birth certificate, 1997-2000. Zhang Z; Macaluso M; Cohen B; Schieve L; Nannini A; Chen M; Wright V; Fertil Steril; 2010 Oct; 94(5):1657-61. PubMed ID: 20004392 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Distribution of male infertility specialists in relation to the male population and assisted reproductive technology centers in the United States. Nangia AK; Likosky DS; Wang D Fertil Steril; 2010 Jul; 94(2):599-609. PubMed ID: 19361796 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Ongoing pregnancy qualifies best as the primary outcome measure of choice in trials in reproductive medicine: an opinion paper. Braakhekke M; Kamphuis EI; Dancet EA; Mol F; van der Veen F; Mol BW Fertil Steril; 2014 May; 101(5):1203-4. PubMed ID: 24786739 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2006. Mansour R; Ishihara O; Adamson GD; Dyer S; de Mouzon J; Nygren KG; Sullivan E; Zegers-Hochschild F Hum Reprod; 2014 Jul; 29(7):1536-51. PubMed ID: 24795090 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Effect of Embryo Banking on U.S. National Assisted Reproductive Technology Live Birth Rates. Kushnir VA; Barad DH; Albertini DF; Darmon SK; Gleicher N PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0154620. PubMed ID: 27159215 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. From the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. Use of assisted reproductive technology--United States, 1996 and 1998. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep; 2002 Feb; 51(5):97-101. PubMed ID: 11892956 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Assisted reproductive technologies in Africa: first results from the African Network and Registry for Assisted Reproductive Technology, 2013. Dyer S; Archary P; de Mouzon J; Fiadjoe M; Ashiru O; Reprod Biomed Online; 2019 Feb; 38(2):216-224. PubMed ID: 30553656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in Canada: 2002 results from the Canadian ART Register. Gunby J; Daya S; Fertil Steril; 2006 Nov; 86(5):1356-64. PubMed ID: 17070192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Do consumers respond to publicly reported quality information? Evidence from nursing homes. Werner RM; Norton EC; Konetzka RT; Polsky D J Health Econ; 2012 Jan; 31(1):50-61. PubMed ID: 22307033 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Access to fertility services for lesbian women in Canada. Corbett SL; Frecker HM; Shapiro HM; Yudin MH Fertil Steril; 2013 Oct; 100(4):1077-80. PubMed ID: 23830154 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. ART reporting: the American view. Lobo RA Hum Reprod; 1996 Jul; 11(7):1369-70. PubMed ID: 8671468 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]