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.
4. Cell-free DNA for Down syndrome screening in obese women: Is it a cost-effective strategy? Hopkins MK; Dugoff L; Durnwald C; Havrilesky LJ; Dotters-Katz S Prenat Diagn; 2020 Jan; 40(2):173-178. PubMed ID: 31803969 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Non-invasive Prenatal Testing for Down Syndrome in China. Xu Y; Wei Y; Ming J; Li N; Xu N; Pong RW; Chen Y Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2019 Jan; 35(3):237-242. PubMed ID: 31131776 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prenatal screening for trisomy 21: a comparative performance and cost analysis of different screening strategies. Huang T; Gibbons C; Rashid S; Priston MK; Bedford HM; Mak-Tam E; Meschino WS BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2020 Nov; 20(1):713. PubMed ID: 33228595 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. First-trimester screening based on cell-free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience. Migliorini S; Saccone G; Silvestro F; Massaro G; Arduino B; D'Alessandro P; Petti MT; Paino JAC; Guida M; Locci M; Zullo F Prenat Diagn; 2020 Oct; 40(11):1482-1488. PubMed ID: 32683755 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The impact of the use of the isolated echogenic intracardiac focus as a screen for Down syndrome in women under the age of 35 years. Caughey AB; Lyell DJ; Filly RA; Washington AE; Norton ME Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Nov; 185(5):1021-7. PubMed ID: 11717625 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cost-effectiveness of five prenatal screening strategies for trisomies and other unbalanced chromosomal abnormalities: model-based analysis. Le Bras A; Salomon LJ; Bussières L; Malan V; Elie C; Mahallati H; Ville Y; Vekemans M; Durand-Zaleski I Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Nov; 54(5):596-603. PubMed ID: 31006923 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies with cell-free DNA in the general pregnancy population: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Fairbrother G; Burigo J; Sharon T; Song K J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2016; 29(7):1160-4. PubMed ID: 26000626 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An isolated intracardiac echogenic focus as a marker for aneuploidy. Bradley KE; Santulli TS; Gregory KD; Herbert W; Carlson DE; Platt LD Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Jun; 192(6):2021-6; discussion 2026-8. PubMed ID: 15970883 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy in singleton pregnancies. Chitayat D; Langlois S; Douglas Wilson R; ; J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2011 Jul; 33(7):736-750. PubMed ID: 21749752 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cell-Free DNA-Based Non-invasive Prenatal Screening for Common Aneuploidies in a Canadian Province: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Nshimyumukiza L; Beaumont JA; Duplantie J; Langlois S; Little J; Audibert F; McCabe C; Gekas J; Giguère Y; Gagné C; Reinharz D; Rousseau F J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2018 Jan; 40(1):48-60. PubMed ID: 28784564 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cell-free DNA and contingent screening: Our first year. Gomes HH; Lourenço I; Ribeiro J; Martins D; Ribeiro R; Francisco C J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod; 2019 Sep; 48(7):509-514. PubMed ID: 30951890 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Meta-analysis of validity of echogenic intracardiac foci for calculating the risk of Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy. Lorente AMR; Moreno-Cid M; Rodríguez MJ; Bueno G; Tenías JM; Román C; Arias Á; Pascual A Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Feb; 56(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 28254219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13, Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies, and Microdeletions in Average-Risk Pregnancies: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Xie X; Wang M; Goh ES; Ungar WJ; Little J; Carroll JC; Okun N; Huang T; Rousseau F; Dougan SD; Tu HA; Higgins C; Holubowich C; Sikich N; Dhalla IA; Ng V J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2020 Jun; 42(6):740-749.e12. PubMed ID: 32008974 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cost-effectiveness of prenatal screening and diagnostic strategies for Down syndrome: A microsimulation modeling analysis. Zhang W; Mohammadi T; Sou J; Anis AH PLoS One; 2019; 14(12):e0225281. PubMed ID: 31800591 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Impact of maternal obesity on fetal cardiac screening: which follow-up strategy is cost-effective? Bak GS; Shaffer BL; Madriago E; Allen A; Kelly B; Caughey AB; Pereira L Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Nov; 56(5):705-716. PubMed ID: 31614030 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing two different strategies in advanced maternal age: Combined first-trimester screening and maternal blood cell-free DNA testing. Pan M; Huang LY; Zhen L; Li DZ Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Aug; 57(4):536-540. PubMed ID: 30122574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]