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 *

72 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3398063)

  • 1. The criterion validity of the Waring Intimacy Questionnaire in a psychiatric inpatient sample.
    Wood GJ; Barnes SM; Waring EM
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1988; 14(1):63-73. PubMed ID: 3398063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The quality and quantity of marital intimacy in the marriages of psychiatric patients.
    Patton D; Waring EM
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1984; 10(3):201-6. PubMed ID: 6512872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sex and marital intimacy.
    Patton D; Waring EM
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1985; 11(3):176-84. PubMed ID: 4068045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Dyadic Adjustment Scale: clinical interest of a revision and validation of an abbreviated form].
    Antoine P; Christophe V; Nandrino JL
    Encephale; 2008 Jan; 34(1):38-46. PubMed ID: 18514149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Chinese version of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale: does language make a difference?
    Shek DT
    J Clin Psychol; 1995 Nov; 51(6):802-11. PubMed ID: 8778129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Criterion validity of two methods of evaluating marital relationships.
    Patton D; Waring EM
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1991; 17(1):22-6. PubMed ID: 2072401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sex differences in marital and social adjustment.
    Kitamura T; Aoki M; Fujino M; Ura C; Watanabe M; Watanabe K; Fujihara S
    J Soc Psychol; 1998 Feb; 138(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 9517310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The increased construct validity and clinical utility of assessing relationship quality using separate positive and negative dimensions.
    Mattson RE; Paldino D; Johnson MD
    Psychol Assess; 2007 Mar; 19(1):146-51. PubMed ID: 17371129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Measuring offence-specific forgiveness in marriage: the Marital Offence-Specific Forgiveness Scale (MOFS).
    Paleari FG; Regalia C; Fincham FD
    Psychol Assess; 2009 Jun; 21(2):194-209. PubMed ID: 19485674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ): scale development and psychometric validation.
    Rosen RC; Catania J; Pollack L; Althof S; O'Leary M; Seftel AD
    Urology; 2004 Oct; 64(4):777-82. PubMed ID: 15491719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Revised dyadic adjustment scale as a reliable tool for assessment of quality of marital relationship in patients on long-term hemodialysis.
    Assari S; Moghani Lankarani M; Tavallaii SA
    Iran J Kidney Dis; 2009 Oct; 3(4):242-5. PubMed ID: 19841530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Methodological studies of orofacial aesthetics, orofacial function and oral health-related quality of life.
    Larsson P
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 2010; (204):11-98. PubMed ID: 20623943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Couples in marital distress: a study of personality factors as measured by the MMPI-2.
    Hjemboe S; Butcher JN
    J Pers Assess; 1991 Oct; 57(2):216-37. PubMed ID: 1955972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Validity and reliability of the Modified Manchester Health Questionnaire in assessing patients with fecal incontinence.
    Kwon S; Visco AG; Fitzgerald MP; Ye W; Whitehead WE;
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2005 Feb; 48(2):323-31; discussion 331-4. PubMed ID: 15616750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Psychometric characteristics of individuals with sexual dysfunction and their partners.
    Schiavi RC; Karstaedt A; Schreiner-Engel P; Mandeli J
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1992; 18(3):219-30. PubMed ID: 1404443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Testing the ruler with item response theory: increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction Index.
    Funk JL; Rogge RD
    J Fam Psychol; 2007 Dec; 21(4):572-83. PubMed ID: 18179329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Enhancing marital sexuality: an evaluation of a program for the sexual enrichment of normal couples.
    Nathan EP; Joanning HH
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1985; 11(3):157-64. PubMed ID: 4068043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Role dissatisfaction and the decline in marital quality across the transition to parenthood.
    Terry DJ; Mchugh TA; Noller P
    Aust J Psychol; 1991 Dec; 43(3):129-32. PubMed ID: 12285193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Convergent and discriminant validity of the Marital Disillusionment Scale.
    Niehuis S
    Psychol Rep; 2007 Feb; 100(1):203-7. PubMed ID: 17451027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sexual history and quality of current relationships in patients with obsessive compulsive disorder: a comparison with two other psychiatric samples.
    Staebler CR; Pollard CA; Merkel WT
    J Sex Marital Ther; 1993; 19(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 8336346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.