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 *

102 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6792223)

  • 1. Comparison of abdominal circumference measurements by real-time and B-scan techniques.
    Clement D; Silverman R; Scott D; Hobbins JC
    J Clin Ultrasound; 1981 Jan; 9(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 6792223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical application of fetal weight determination by real-time ultrasound measurements.
    Ott WJ
    Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Jun; 57(6):758-62. PubMed ID: 7231830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Estimate of fetal weight by measuring the abdominal circumference].
    Rodríguez N; Behnke E; Bernal J; Farías J; Alarcón H; Lisoni M
    Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol; 1979; 44(3):89-93. PubMed ID: 262662
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fetal abdominal circumference as a predictor of menstrual age.
    Hadlock FP; Deter RL; Harrist RB; Park SK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1982 Aug; 139(2):367-70. PubMed ID: 6979895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sonographic abdominal circumference: dynamic versus static imaging.
    Weiner CP; Sabbagha RE; Tamura RK; DalCompo S
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Apr; 139(8):953-5. PubMed ID: 7223797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Abdominal circumference vs abdominal area--which is better?
    Woo JS; Liang ST; Wan CW; Ghosh A; Cho KM; Wong V
    J Ultrasound Med; 1984 Mar; 3(3):101-5. PubMed ID: 6726856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Principles and applications of a dynamically focused phased array real time ultrasound system.
    Morgan CL; Trought WS; Clark WM; Von Ramm OT; Thurstone FL
    J Clin Ultrasound; 1978 Dec; 6(6):385-91. PubMed ID: 103915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Head circumference as an index of fetal age.
    Law RG; MacRae KD
    J Ultrasound Med; 1982 Sep; 1(7):281-8. PubMed ID: 7169655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Computer-assisted analysis for prediction of fetal weight by ultrasound-comparison of biparietal diameter (BPD), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL).
    Hsieh FJ; Chang FM; Huang HC; Lu CC; Ko TM; Chen HY
    Taiwan Yi Xue Hui Za Zhi; 1987 Sep; 86(9):957-64. PubMed ID: 3320270
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Fetal weight estimation formulas with head, abdominal, femur, and thigh circumference measurements.
    Vintzileos AM; Campbell WA; Rodis JF; Bors-Koefoed R; Nochimson DJ
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1987 Aug; 157(2):410-4. PubMed ID: 3618691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of fetal biometric ratios to neonatal morphometrics.
    Hays D; Patterson RM
    J Ultrasound Med; 1987 Feb; 6(2):71-3. PubMed ID: 3560313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Abdominal and obstetric applications of a dynamically focused phased array real time ultrasound system.
    Morgan CL; Trought WS; von Ramm OT; Thurstone FL
    Clin Radiol; 1980 May; 31(3):277-86. PubMed ID: 7428266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Charts of fetal size: 3. Abdominal measurements.
    Chitty LS; Altman DG; Henderson A; Campbell S
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1994 Feb; 101(2):125-31. PubMed ID: 8305386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Fetal weight estimation by ultrasonic measurement of abdominal circumference.
    Kearney K; Vigneron N; Frischman P; Johnson JW
    Obstet Gynecol; 1978 Feb; 51(2):156-62. PubMed ID: 622227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Ultrasonic evaluation of fetal weight by comparing the circumference and area of the trunk].
    Cecuk S; Breyer B
    Jugosl Ginekol Opstet; 1982; 22(5-6):111-7. PubMed ID: 7166966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fetal biometry: how well can offline measurements from three-dimensional volumes substitute real-time two-dimensional measurements?
    Sarris I; Ohuma E; Ioannou C; Sande J; Altman DG; Papageorghiou AT;
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Nov; 42(5):560-70. PubMed ID: 23335102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The estimation of fetal weight by computer-assisted analysis.
    Warsof SL; Gohari P; Berkowitz RL; Hobbins JC
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1977 Aug; 128(8):881-92. PubMed ID: 888868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Revisiting sonographic abdominal circumference measurements: a comparison of outer centiles with established nomograms.
    Smulian JC; Ananth CV; Vintzileos AM; Guzman ER
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Sep; 18(3):237-43. PubMed ID: 11555453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Ultrasound measurement of fetal abdominal circumference and the ratio of biparietal diameter to transverse abdominal diameter in a mixed Nigerian population.
    Okonofua FE; Ayangade SO; Ajibulu OA
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 1988 Aug; 27(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 2905282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Diminished biparietal diameter and abdominal circumference growth in twins.
    Socol ML; Tamura RK; Sabbagha RE; Chen T; Vaisrub N
    Obstet Gynecol; 1984 Aug; 64(2):235-8. PubMed ID: 6738957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.