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 *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32476747)

  • 1. Discordant dating of pregnancy by LMP and ultrasound and its implications in perinatal statistics.
    Sharma LK; Bindal J; Shrivastava VA; Sharma M; Choorakuttil RM; Nirmalan PK
    Indian J Radiol Imaging; 2020; 30(1):27-31. PubMed ID: 32476747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reliability of last menstrual period recall, an early ultrasound and a Smartphone App in predicting date of delivery and classification of preterm and post-term births.
    Majola L; Budhram S; Govender V; Naidoo M; Godlwana Z; Lombard C; Moodley D
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2021 Jul; 21(1):493. PubMed ID: 34233644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Maternal obesity is a potential source of error in mid-trimester ultrasound estimation of gestational age.
    Simic M; Wåhlin IA; Marsál K; Källén K
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2010 Jan; 35(1):48-53. PubMed ID: 20033998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Maternal and fetal characteristics affect discrepancies between pregnancy-dating methods: a population-based cross-sectional register study.
    Kullinger M; Wesström J; Kieler H; Skalkidou A
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2017 Jan; 96(1):86-95. PubMed ID: 27696340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Prospective population-based cohort study of maternal obesity as a source of error in gestational age estimation at 11-14 weeks.
    Bak GS; Sperling L; Källén K; Salvesen KÅ
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2016 Nov; 95(11):1281-1287. PubMed ID: 27517739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Women's perception of accuracy of ultrasound dating in late pregnancy: a challenge to prevention of prolonged pregnancy in a resource-poor Nigerian setting.
    Ugwu EO; Odoh GU; Dim CC; Obi SN; Ezugwu EC; Okafor II
    Int J Womens Health; 2014; 6():195-200. PubMed ID: 24550682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy of gestational age estimation from last menstrual period among women seeking abortion in South Africa, with a view to task sharing: a mixed methods study.
    Constant D; Harries J; Moodley J; Myer L
    Reprod Health; 2017 Aug; 14(1):100. PubMed ID: 28830534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Determining gestational age and preterm birth in rural Guatemala: A comparison of methods.
    Weinstein JR; Thompson LM; Díaz Artiga A; Bryan JP; Arriaga WE; Omer SB; McCracken JP
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(3):e0193666. PubMed ID: 29554145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Study protocol of a 4- parallel arm, superiority, community based cluster randomized controlled trial comparing paper and e-platform based interventions to improve accuracy of recall of last menstrual period (LMP) dates in rural Bangladesh.
    Salam SS; Ali NB; Rahman AE; Tahsina T; Islam MI; Iqbal A; Hoque DME; Saha SK; El Arifeen S
    BMC Public Health; 2018 Dec; 18(1):1359. PubMed ID: 30526560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. How well does fetal ultrasound predict the date of birth in Antigua and Barbuda?
    Martin TC; Miles RL; Edwards K
    West Indian Med J; 2005 Mar; 54(2):123-6. PubMed ID: 15999882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A home calendar and recall method of last menstrual period for estimating gestational age in rural Bangladesh: a validation study.
    Gernand AD; Paul RR; Ullah B; Taher MA; Witter FR; Wu L; Labrique AB; West KP; Christian P
    J Health Popul Nutr; 2016 Oct; 35(1):34. PubMed ID: 27769295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The research implications of the selection of a gestational age estimation method.
    Lynch CD; Zhang J
    Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2007 Sep; 21 Suppl 2():86-96. PubMed ID: 17803622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Discrepancy between pregnancy dating methods affects obstetric and neonatal outcomes: a population-based register cohort study.
    Kullinger M; Granfors M; Kieler H; Skalkidou A
    Sci Rep; 2018 May; 8(1):6936. PubMed ID: 29720591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Estimating the Beginning of Pregnancy in German Claims Data: Development of an Algorithm With a Focus on the Expected Delivery Date.
    Schink T; Wentzell N; Dathe K; Onken M; Haug U
    Front Public Health; 2020; 8():350. PubMed ID: 32903398
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of gestational age at birth based on last menstrual period and ultrasound during the first trimester.
    Hoffman CS; Messer LC; Mendola P; Savitz DA; Herring AH; Hartmann KE
    Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2008 Nov; 22(6):587-96. PubMed ID: 19000297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risk of cesarean delivery when second-trimester ultrasound dating disagrees with definite last menstrual period.
    Grewal J; Zhang J; Mikolajczyk RT; Ford J
    Am J Perinatol; 2010 Aug; 27(7):587-93. PubMed ID: 20232279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Problems with gestational age estimation by last menstrual period and ultrasound among late antenatal care attendant women in a low-resource setting in Africa, Sudan.
    Alyahyawi A; Adam GK; AlHabardi N; Adam I
    J Ultrasound; 2024 Mar; 27(1):129-135. PubMed ID: 38236459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Correction of systematic bias in ultrasound dating in studies of small-for-gestational-age birth: an example from the Iowa Health in Pregnancy Study.
    Harland KK; Saftlas AF; Wallis AB; Yankowitz J; Triche EW; Zimmerman MB
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Sep; 176(5):443-55. PubMed ID: 22886591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Improving preterm newborn identification in low-resource settings with machine learning.
    Rittenhouse KJ; Vwalika B; Keil A; Winston J; Stoner M; Price JT; Kapasa M; Mubambe M; Banda V; Muunga W; Stringer JSA
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(2):e0198919. PubMed ID: 30811399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of LMP-based and ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age using linked California livebirth and prenatal screening records.
    Dietz PM; England LJ; Callaghan WM; Pearl M; Wier ML; Kharrazi M
    Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2007 Sep; 21 Suppl 2():62-71. PubMed ID: 17803619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.