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 *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3319323)

  • 1. The nonstress test.
    Keegan KA
    Clin Obstet Gynecol; 1987 Dec; 30(4):921-35. PubMed ID: 3319323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Simplified biophysical profile: an antepartum fetal screening test.
    Kamel HS; Makhlouf AM; Youssef AA
    Gynecol Obstet Invest; 1999; 47(4):223-8. PubMed ID: 10352381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical study on detecting false non-reactive of non-stress test by improved acoustic stimulation.
    Xi Q; Du J; Liu X; Shao L
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2011 Aug; 284(2):271-4. PubMed ID: 20677022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fetal acoustic stimulation testing. III. Predictive value of a reactive test.
    Smith CV; Phelan JP; Broussard P; Paul RH
    J Reprod Med; 1988 Feb; 33(2):217-8. PubMed ID: 3351822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Factors that increase reactivity during fetal nonstress testing.
    Esin S
    Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Apr; 26(2):61-6. PubMed ID: 24614020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of the auscultated acceleration test and the nonstress test as predictors of perinatal outcomes.
    Paine LL; Benedict MI; Strobino DM; Gegor CL; Larson EL
    Nurs Res; 1992; 41(2):87-91. PubMed ID: 1549525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Routine use of antenatal nonstress tests in pregnant women with diabetes-What is the practice?
    Jørgensen IL; Vestgaard M; Ásbjörnsdóttir B; Mathiesen ER; Damm P
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2020 May; 248():89-94. PubMed ID: 32199298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The diagnostic values of concurrent nonstress testing, amniotic fluid measurement, and Doppler velocimetry in screening a general high-risk population.
    Devoe LD; Gardner P; Dear C; Castillo RA
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1990 Sep; 163(3):1040-7; discussion 1047-8. PubMed ID: 2206056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Continuing experience with the fetal acoustic stimulation test.
    Smith CV; Phelan JP; Nguyen HN; Jacobs N; Paul RH
    J Reprod Med; 1988 Apr; 33(4):365-8. PubMed ID: 3367338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Auscultated fetal heart rate accelerations. An alternative to the nonstress test.
    Daniels SM; Boehm N
    J Nurse Midwifery; 1991; 36(2):88-94. PubMed ID: 2037878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The nonstress test: the false negative test.
    Phelan JP; Cromartie AD; Smith CV
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1982 Feb; 142(3):293-6. PubMed ID: 7065018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [The role of vibroacoustic stimulation in antenatal fetal assessment].
    Leis Marquez MT; Hernández Andrade E; Maya Goldsmit D; Pérez de la Huerta MI; López García RB
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 1993 Dec; 61():356-9. PubMed ID: 8119607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of the manual stimulation test and the nonstress test: a randomized controlled trial.
    Piyamongkol W; Trungtawatchai S; Chanprapaph P; Tongsong T
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2006 Dec; 89(12):1999-2002. PubMed ID: 17214048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative study of stressed and nonstressed antepartum fetal heart rate testing.
    Keane MW; Horger EO; Vice L
    Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Mar; 57(3):320-4. PubMed ID: 7465146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Biophysical profile for antepartum fetal assessment.
    Norman LA; Karp LE
    Am Fam Physician; 1986 Oct; 34(4):83-9. PubMed ID: 3532741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The modified biophysical profile: antepartum testing in the 1990s.
    Miller DA; Rabello YA; Paul RH
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1996 Mar; 174(3):812-7. PubMed ID: 8633648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An evaluation of antenatal fetal acoustic stimulation.
    Schwartz DB; Sherman SJ; Goyert GL; Fields P; Simkins S; Daoud Y
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 1991 Jul; 40(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 2070957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A prospective trial of the fetal biophysical profile versus the nonstress test in the management of high-risk pregnancies.
    Platt LD; Walla CA; Paul RH; Trujillo ME; Loesser CV; Jacobs ND; Broussard PM
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1985 Nov; 153(6):624-33. PubMed ID: 4061530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The nonstress test.
    Devoe LD
    Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am; 1990 Mar; 17(1):111-28. PubMed ID: 2192314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The predictive value of a nonstress test taken 24 h before delivery in high-risk pregnancies.
    Salamalekis E; Vitoratos N; Loghis C; Mortakis A; Zourlas PA
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 1994 May; 45(2):105-7. PubMed ID: 7915677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.