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 *

223 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9103656)

  • 1. Antenatal fetal assessment using biophysical profile score.
    Begum F; Buckshee K; Pande JN
    Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull; 1996 Aug; 22(2):51-9. PubMed ID: 9103656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Fetal biophysical profile and perinatal death.
    Baskett TF; Allen AC; Gray JH; Young DC; Young LM
    Obstet Gynecol; 1987 Sep; 70(3 Pt 1):357-60. PubMed ID: 3306498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Biophysical profile for antepartum fetal assessment.
    Norman LA; Karp LE
    Am Fam Physician; 1986 Oct; 34(4):83-9. PubMed ID: 3532741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A prospective trial of the fetal biophysical profile versus the nonstress test in the management of high-risk pregnancies.
    Platt LD; Walla CA; Paul RH; Trujillo ME; Loesser CV; Jacobs ND; Broussard PM
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1985 Nov; 153(6):624-33. PubMed ID: 4061530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Antepartum surveillance in preterm rupture of membranes.
    Vintzileos AM
    J Perinat Med; 1996; 24(4):319-26. PubMed ID: 8880628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Prediction of fetal hypoxia using the fetal biophysical profile].
    Urbánková E; Toldy M
    Cesk Gynekol; 1989 Dec; 54(10):733-9. PubMed ID: 2698277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Perinatal outcome with the modified biophysical profile.
    Nageotte MP; Towers CV; Asrat T; Freeman RK
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Jun; 170(6):1672-6. PubMed ID: 8203424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Evaluation of fetal well-being using a modified Doppler flowmetric profile].
    Romero Gutiérrez G; Vargas Origel A; Zamora Orozco J; Alvarado López MR
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2000 Sep; 68():371-80. PubMed ID: 11080943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Fetal congenital malformations. Biophysical profile evaluation.
    Lin CC; Adamczyk CJ; Sheikh Z; Mittendorf R
    J Reprod Med; 1998 Jun; 43(6):521-7. PubMed ID: 9653699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Further experience with the fetal biophysical profile.
    Platt LD; Eglinton GS; Sipos L; Broussard PM; Paul RH
    Obstet Gynecol; 1983 Apr; 61(4):480-5. PubMed ID: 6681892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Biophysical profile in twin pregnancy: prospective study].
    Medina D; Vargas N; Bustos JC; Cadima R; Lavarello C
    Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol; 1994; 59(5):343-8. PubMed ID: 7569148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Biophysical profile in prolonged pregnancy. Another alternative to fetal monitoring].
    Jiménez Solis G; Izquierdo Puente JC; Barraza Espinoza RM; Sánchez Tenorio E; García Alonso A
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 1990 Oct; 58():284-8. PubMed ID: 2292430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Biophysical profile as a predictor of amniotic fluid culture results.
    Gauthier DW; Meyer WJ; Bieniarz A
    Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Jul; 80(1):102-5. PubMed ID: 1603477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Biophysical profile in prolonged pregnancy. Another alternative of fetal surveillance].
    Jiménez Solis G; Izquierdo Puente JC; Barraza Espinoza RM; Sánchez Tenorio E; García Alonso A
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 1990 Oct; 58():284-8. PubMed ID: 2101378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The value of a negative antepartum test: contraction stress test and modified biophysical profile.
    Nageotte MP; Towers CV; Asrat T; Freeman RK; Dorchester W
    Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Aug; 84(2):231-4. PubMed ID: 8041536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Combination of vibroacoustic stimulation and acute variables of mFBP as a simple assessment method of low-risk fetuses.
    Petrović O; Finderle A; Prodan M; Skunca E; Prpić I; Zaputović S
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2009 Feb; 22(2):152-6. PubMed ID: 19253163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Contraction stress test versus ductus venosus Doppler evaluation for the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in growth-restricted fetuses with non-reassuring non-stress test.
    Figueras F; Martínez JM; Puerto B; Coll O; Cararach V; Vanrell JA
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2003 Mar; 21(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12666219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The fetal biophysical profile score: a routine screening technique for pregnant women.
    Awad MM
    J Egypt Soc Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Jan; 17(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 12317330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The biophysical profile in labor.
    Sassoon DA; Castro LC; Davis JL; Bear M; Hobel CJ
    Obstet Gynecol; 1990 Sep; 76(3 Pt 1):360-5. PubMed ID: 2381614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The efficacy of rapid biophysical profile in predicting poor pregnancy outcomes in suspected intrauterine growth restriction fetuses: preliminary study.
    Chousawai S; Tongprasert F; Yanase Y; Udomwan P; Tongsong T
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2012 Apr; 95(4):482-6. PubMed ID: 22611999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.