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.
208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3514951)
1. New observations in the sonographic evaluation of intrauterine contraceptive devices. Najarian KE; Kurtz AB J Ultrasound Med; 1986 Apr; 5(4):205-10. PubMed ID: 3514951 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Scanning and transmission electron microscopy of material adherent to intrauterine contraceptive devices. Sheppard BL; Bonnar J Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1980 Feb; 87(2):155-62. PubMed ID: 7362803 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [The end of IUD marketing in the United States: what does it mean for American women?]. Forrest JD Contracept Fertil Sex (Paris); 1987 Mar; 15(3):291-300. PubMed ID: 12341479 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The rise and fall and rise of the IUD. Burnhill MS Am J Gynecol Health; 1989; 3(3-S):6-10. PubMed ID: 12285000 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effects of intrauterine contraceptive devices on the ultrastructure of the endometrium in relation to bleeding complications. Sheppard BL; Bonnar J Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1983 Aug; 146(7):829-39. PubMed ID: 6869454 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Short notes on intrauterine devices. Indian J Med Sci; 1990 May; 44(5):129-33. PubMed ID: 2397950 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Does the type of intrauterine device affect conspicuity on 2D and 3D ultrasound? Moschos E; Twickler DM AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jun; 196(6):1439-43. PubMed ID: 21606311 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Experience with two different medicated intrauterine devices: a comparative study of the Progestasert and Nova-T. Fylling P; Fagerhol M Fertil Steril; 1979 Feb; 31(2):138-41. PubMed ID: 761675 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Suspension of IUD sales in the United States: what are the international implications?]. Ramirez FJ; Starrs AM Perspect Int Planif Fam; 1987; (Spec No):28-34. PubMed ID: 12269049 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The intrauterine device today. Rioux JE J SOGC; 1993 Oct; 15(8):921-4. PubMed ID: 12318529 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Acceptability of IUDs is increasing. Finger WR; Barr D Netw Res Triangle Park N C; 1992 Oct; 13(2):27-30. PubMed ID: 12286082 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. New developments in intrauterine devices. Farr G Netw Res Triangle Park N C; 1991 Sep; 12(2):9. PubMed ID: 12284281 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of a progesterone-releasing intrauterine contraceptive device on endometrial blood vessels: a morphometric study. Shaw ST; Macaulay LK; Aznar R; González-Angulo A; Roy S Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Dec; 141(7):821-7. PubMed ID: 7315908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparative study of the ease of removal of intrauterine contraceptive devices. Roke CM Contraception; 1988 Jun; 37(6):555-63. PubMed ID: 3396356 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Steroid intra-uterine contraception: progesterone-releasing devices. II. Insertion, clinical problems and contraceptive dependability]. Custo GM; Cosmi EV Patol Clin Ostet Ginecol; 1984; 12(4):331-43. PubMed ID: 12340352 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]