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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38370509)

  • 1. Clear as Mud: Readability Scores in Cloacal Exstrophy Literature and Its Treatment.
    Haffar A; Hirsch A; Morrill C; Garcia A; Werner Z; Gearhart JP; Crigger C
    Res Rep Urol; 2024; 16():39-44. PubMed ID: 38370509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Readability of Online Information Regarding Hip Osteoarthritis.
    Lim B; Chai A; Shaalan M
    Cureus; 2024 May; 16(5):e60536. PubMed ID: 38887325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery: assessing the readability and quality of online information.
    Raja H; Patel K
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2023 Sep; 105(7):639-644. PubMed ID: 36374281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quality Assessment of Online Resources for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome Patients.
    Clothier W; Treffalls JA; Tolbert PH; Harbin Z; Yan Q; Davies MG
    Ann Vasc Surg; 2022 Sep; 85():96-104. PubMed ID: 35461994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Analysis of the quality, accuracy, and readability of patient information on polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) on the internet available in English: a cross-sectional study.
    Vågenes H; Pranić SM
    Reprod Biol Endocrinol; 2023 May; 21(1):44. PubMed ID: 37189154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessment of online patient education materials from major ophthalmologic associations.
    Huang G; Fang CH; Agarwal N; Bhagat N; Eloy JA; Langer PD
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2015 Apr; 133(4):449-54. PubMed ID: 25654639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Readability assessment of online ophthalmic patient information.
    Edmunds MR; Barry RJ; Denniston AK
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2013 Dec; 131(12):1610-6. PubMed ID: 24178035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Readability of online COVID-19 health information: a comparison between four English speaking countries.
    Worrall AP; Connolly MJ; O'Neill A; O'Doherty M; Thornton KP; McNally C; McConkey SJ; de Barra E
    BMC Public Health; 2020 Nov; 20(1):1635. PubMed ID: 33183297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Readability, reliability and credibility of online patient information on skin grafts.
    Heaven CL; Patel C; Ahmadi O; Mathy JA
    Australas J Dermatol; 2023 Feb; 64(1):e57-e64. PubMed ID: 36354108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Patient-Directed Vasectomy Information: How Readable Is It?
    Kianian R; Hu MY; Lavold AJ; Andino JJ; Morrison JC; Eleswarapu SV; Mills JN
    World J Mens Health; 2024 Apr; 42(2):408-414. PubMed ID: 37853530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An evaluation of the readability, quality, and accuracy of online health information regarding the treatment of hypospadias.
    Cisu TI; Mingin GC; Baskin LS
    J Pediatr Urol; 2019 Feb; 15(1):40.e1-40.e6. PubMed ID: 30449679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessing comprehension of online information in the United States for third-line treatment of overactive bladder.
    Werner Z; Trump T; Zaslau S; Shapiro R
    Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Mar; 34(3):701-705. PubMed ID: 35556151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Health Literacy in Clubfoot: A Quantitative Assessment of the Readability, Understandability and Actionability of Online Patient Education Material.
    Skalitzky MK; Gulbrandsen TR; Lorentzen W; Gao B; Shamrock AG; Weinstein SL; Morcuende JA
    Iowa Orthop J; 2021; 41(1):61-67. PubMed ID: 34552405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Quantitative Assessment of Online Patient Education Resources.
    Gulbrandsen TR; Skalitzky MK; Ryan SE; Gao B; Shamrock AG; Brown TS; Elkins JM
    Iowa Orthop J; 2022; 42(2):98-106. PubMed ID: 36601227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing the readability and quality of online information on anosmia.
    Raja H; Lodhi S
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2024 Feb; 106(2):178-184. PubMed ID: 37051757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Risks Associated With Computed Tomography Scans: An Assessment of the Readability and Reliability of Online Text Available for Patient Information and Guidance.
    Hemaya M; Hemaya M; Habeeb A
    Cureus; 2022 Oct; 14(10):e30758. PubMed ID: 36447695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Readability analysis of online health information on preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP).
    Kecojevic A; Basch CH; Garcia P
    Public Health; 2020 May; 182():53-55. PubMed ID: 32171091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Online Patient Information for Hysterectomies: A Systematic Environmental Scan of Quality and Readability.
    Jain M; Chkipov P; Stacey D; Posner G; Bacal V; Chen I
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2022 Aug; 44(8):870-876. PubMed ID: 35487458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Analysis of the Readability and Accountability of Online Patient Education Materials Related to Glaucoma Diagnosis and Treatment.
    Cohen SA; Fisher AC; Pershing S
    Clin Ophthalmol; 2023; 17():779-788. PubMed ID: 36923248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Online educational materials for appendectomy patients have good quality but poor readability.
    Rai R; Landsberg A; Nguyen A; Wiseman SM
    Am J Surg; 2021 Jun; 221(6):1203-1210. PubMed ID: 33712262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.