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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37594241)

  • 1. An assault upon women: reproductive rights in the US in the shadow of the 2022 US Supreme Court Ruling (the Dobbs ruling).
    Hill M; Houghton F; Keogh Hoss MA
    J R Soc Med; 2023 Sep; 116(9):291-294. PubMed ID: 37594241
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The United States Supreme Court ruling and women's reproductive rights - A position statement issued by The European Board and College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG).
    Louwen F; Mukhopadhyay S; Mahmood T; Martins NN; Tarlatzis B;
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2022 Dec; 279():130-131. PubMed ID: 36334375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Advancing Birth Equity in a Post-Dobbs US.
    Crear-Perry J; Hassan A; Daniel S
    JAMA; 2022 Nov; 328(17):1689-1690. PubMed ID: 36318120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Supreme Court Ruling on the Texas Abortion Law: Beginning to Unravel Roe v Wade.
    Cohen IG; Reingold RB; Gostin LO
    JAMA; 2022 Feb; 327(7):621-622. PubMed ID: 35089318
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Trends in Abortion- and Contraception-Related Internet Searches After the US Supreme Court Overturned Constitutional Abortion Rights: How Much Do State Laws Matter?
    Gupta S; Perry B; Simon K
    JAMA Health Forum; 2023 Apr; 4(4):e230518. PubMed ID: 37115538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Defying the will of the people: The US Supreme Court overturns right to abortion.
    Macklin R
    Indian J Med Ethics; 2022; VII(4):261-263. PubMed ID: 36398395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. US Supreme Court upholds abortion rights, for now.
    Jaffe S
    Lancet; 2020 Jul; 396(10244):85-86. PubMed ID: 32653060
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Challenging the US Supreme Court's Majority Ruling on
    Berer M
    Health Hum Rights; 2023 Jun; 25(1):195-206. PubMed ID: 37397425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Resignation of US judge puts reproductive rights at risk.
    Hopkins Tanne J
    BMJ; 2005 Jul; 331(7509):130. PubMed ID: 16020851
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. State Courts, State Legislatures, and Setting Abortion Policy.
    Kim JH; Gunderson A; Lane EA; Bauer NM
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 2023 Aug; 48(4):569-592. PubMed ID: 36693180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Medicine, eugenics, and the Supreme Court: from coercive sterilization to reproductive freedom.
    Lombardo PA
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1996; 13(1):1-25. PubMed ID: 9068235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Associations between state policies, race, ethnicity and rurality, and maternal mortality and morbidity following the United States Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling.
    Williams AM; Chaturvedi R; Pollalis I; Ibarra-Cobarru J; Aaronson JA; White RS
    Br J Anaesth; 2022 Dec; 129(6):e145-e147. PubMed ID: 36163076
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cruzan after Dobbs: What Remains of the Constitutional Right to Refuse Treatment?
    Dresser R
    Hastings Cent Rep; 2023 Mar; 53(2):9-11. PubMed ID: 37092653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Implications of United States Supreme Court's ruling on Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization: perspective of physicians caring for critically ill fetuses and newborns.
    Arya B; Donofrio MT; Freud LR; Hornberger LK; Moon-Grady AJ; Morris SA; Pinto N; Simpson LL; Cuneo BF; Divanovic A; Jaeggi E; Peyvandi S; Puchalski MD; Rychik J; Schidlow DN; Srivastava S; Tacy TA; Tworetzky W; Walsh MJ
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Dec; 60(6):812-813. PubMed ID: 36353858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Troubling Court Decision for Reproductive Rights: Legal Recognition of Fetal Standing to Sue.
    Fox D; Adashi EY; Cohen IG
    JAMA; 2019 Jul; 322(1):23-24. PubMed ID: 31116380
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Substantial Shifts in Supreme Court Health Law Jurisprudence.
    Gostin LO; Hodge JG
    JAMA; 2018 Oct; 320(14):1431-1432. PubMed ID: 30193377
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reproductive Rights and Women's Mental Health.
    Stotland NL
    Psychiatr Clin North Am; 2023 Sep; 46(3):607-619. PubMed ID: 37500254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Obstacles to Care Mount 1 Year After Dobbs Decision.
    Verma N; Grossman D
    JAMA; 2023 Jul; 330(2):119-120. PubMed ID: 37351896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The supreme court and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003: a political procedure replaces woman-centered care.
    Blumenthal PD; Winikoff B
    MedGenMed; 2007 Jun; 9(2):52. PubMed ID: 17955106
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Protecting our Patients and Trainees: The Complex Consequences of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Ruling.
    Ponce SB; Bajaj A; Baniel C; Seldon C; Sim A; Franco I; Pinnix C; Fields E; Jimenez RB
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2022 Nov; 114(3):393-395. PubMed ID: 35963469
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.