207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33170179)
1. Complications related to in vitro reproductive techniques support the implementation of natural procreative technologies.
Kiani AK; Paolacci S; Scanzano P; Michelini S; Capodicasa N; D'Agruma L; Notarangelo A; Tonini G; Piccinelli D; Farshid KR; Petralia P; Fulcheri E; Chiurazzi P; Terranova C; Plotti F; Angioli R; Castori M; Bertelli M
Acta Biomed; 2020 Nov; 91(13-S):e2020018. PubMed ID: 33170179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Pregnancy outcomes after assisted human reproduction.
Okun N; Sierra S; ;
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2014 Jan; 36(1):64-83. PubMed ID: 24444289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study.
Stanford JB; Carpentier PA; Meier BL; Rollo M; Tingey B
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2021 Jul; 21(1):495. PubMed ID: 34233646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Marital Satisfaction of Infertile Couples Using Natural Procreative Technology (NaProTECHNOLOGY).
Camacho A; Konicki AJ; McGrath JM; Carpentier P
J Christ Nurs; 2021 Oct-Dec 01; 38(4):224-229. PubMed ID: 33234801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Outcomes from treatment of infertility with natural procreative technology in an Irish general practice.
Stanford JB; Parnell TA; Boyle PC
J Am Board Fam Med; 2008; 21(5):375-84. PubMed ID: 18772291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Assisted Reproductive Technology and Birth Defects: Effects of Subfertility and Multiple Births.
Liberman RF; Getz KD; Heinke D; Luke B; Stern JE; Declercq ER; Chen X; Lin AE; Anderka M
Birth Defects Res; 2017 Aug; 109(14):1144-1153. PubMed ID: 28635008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pre-Conception Interventions for Subfertile Couples Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment: Modeling Analysis.
Steegers-Theunissen R; Hoek A; Groen H; Bos A; van den Dool G; Schoonenberg M; Smeenk J; Creutzberg E; Vecht L; Starmans L; Laven J
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth; 2020 Nov; 8(11):e19570. PubMed ID: 33226349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Advanced reproductive age and fertility.
Liu K; Case A;
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2011 Nov; 33(11):1165-1175. PubMed ID: 22082792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2000.
Wright VC; Schieve LA; Reynolds MA; Jeng G
MMWR Surveill Summ; 2003 Aug; 52(9):1-16. PubMed ID: 14532867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Committee Opinion No 671 Summary: Perinatal Risks Associated With Assisted Reproductive Technology.
Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Sep; 128(3):672-673. PubMed ID: 27548550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Obstetrical and perinatal complications of twin pregnancies: is there a link with the type of infertility treatment?
Deltombe-Bodart S; Deruelle P; Drumez E; Cordiez S; Catteau-Jonard S; Garabedian C
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2017 Jul; 96(7):844-851. PubMed ID: 28369714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Workshop report: evaluation of genetic and epigenetic risks associated with assisted reproductive technologies and infertility.
Weksberg R; Shuman C; Wilkins-Haug L; Mann M; Croughan M; Stewart D; Rakowsky C; Leader A; Hall J; Friedman JM; Simpson JL; Holmes L; Infante-Rivard C
Fertil Steril; 2007 Jul; 88(1):27-31. PubMed ID: 17442312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Risk of major congenital malformations associated with infertility and its treatment by extent of iatrogenic intervention.
Farhi J; Fisch B
Pediatr Endocrinol Rev; 2007 Jun; 4(4):352-7. PubMed ID: 17643083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The acceptability of stem cell-based fertility treatments for different indications.
Hendriks S; Dancet EAF; Vliegenthart R; Repping S
Mol Hum Reprod; 2017 Dec; 23(12):855-863. PubMed ID: 28460040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects.
Davies MJ; Moore VM; Willson KJ; Van Essen P; Priest K; Scott H; Haan EA; Chan A
N Engl J Med; 2012 May; 366(19):1803-13. PubMed ID: 22559061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Transitioning from Infertility-Based (ART 1.0) to Elective (ART 2.0) Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies and the DOHaD Hypothesis: Do We Need to Change Consenting?
Rinaudo P; Adeleye A
Semin Reprod Med; 2018 May; 36(3-04):204-210. PubMed ID: 30866007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Evaluation and Treatment of Cervical Factor Infertility a Medical-Moral Analysis.
Keefe CE; Mirkes R; Yeung P
Linacre Q; 2012 Nov; 79(4):409-425. PubMed ID: 30082986
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs): evaluation of evidence to support public policy development.
Nardelli AA; Stafinski T; Motan T; Klein K; Menon D
Reprod Health; 2014 Nov; 11(1):76. PubMed ID: 25376649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The casual effect of lifestyle factors on outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques: a protocol study on Iranian infertile couples.
Sepidarkish M; Omani-Samani R; Mansournia MA; Yekaninejad MS; Mardi-Mamaghani A; Vesali S; Hosseini R; Nedjat S
Reprod Health; 2018 Dec; 15(1):210. PubMed ID: 30558625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century.
Inhorn MC; Patrizio P
Hum Reprod Update; 2015; 21(4):411-26. PubMed ID: 25801630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
