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 *

108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9800941)

  • 1. Routine ultrasound has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method.
    Zimmermann R; Wisser J
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1998 Oct; 105(10):1126-7. PubMed ID: 9800941
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Routine ultrasound dating has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method.
    Pistorius LR
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1998 Sep; 105(9):1039-40. PubMed ID: 9763063
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Routine ultrasound dating has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method.
    Olsen O; Aaroe Clausen J
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1997 Nov; 104(11):1221-2. PubMed ID: 9386019
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Routine ultrasound dating has not been shown to be more accurate than the calendar method.
    Backe B; Nakling J
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1998 Dec; 105(12):1335-6. PubMed ID: 9883931
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Routine ultrasound is the method of choice for dating pregnancy.
    Gardosi J; Geirsson RT
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1998 Sep; 105(9):933-6. PubMed ID: 9763041
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Should second trimester ultrasound be routine for all pregnancies?
    Makhlouf M; Saade G
    Semin Perinatol; 2013 Oct; 37(5):323-6. PubMed ID: 24176154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan.
    Salomon LJ; Alfirevic Z; Berghella V; Bilardo C; Hernandez-Andrade E; Johnsen SL; Kalache K; Leung KY; Malinger G; Munoz H; Prefumo F; Toi A; Lee W;
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Jan; 37(1):116-26. PubMed ID: 20842655
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Should a first trimester dating scan be routine for all pregnancies?
    Doubilet PM
    Semin Perinatol; 2013 Oct; 37(5):307-9. PubMed ID: 24176152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Failure to diagnose a fetal anomaly on a routine ultrasound scan at 20 weeks.
    Alfirevic Z
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Dec; 26(7):797-8. PubMed ID: 16308908
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prenatal ultrasound examinations: for whom, by whom, what, when and how many?
    Bronshtein M; Zimmer EZ
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 1997 Jul; 10(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 9263414
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of emergency physicians using ultrasound to determine gestational age in pregnant women.
    Shah S; Teismann N; Zaia B; Vahidnia F; River G; Price D; Nagdev A
    Am J Emerg Med; 2010 Sep; 28(7):834-8. PubMed ID: 20837264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Validity of gestational age estimates by last menstrual period and neonatal examination compared to ultrasound in Vietnam.
    Deputy NP; Nguyen PH; Pham H; Nguyen S; Neufeld L; Martorell R; Ramakrishnan U
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2017 Jan; 17(1):25. PubMed ID: 28077098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: role of ultrasound in twin pregnancy.
    Khalil A; Rodgers M; Baschat A; Bhide A; Gratacos E; Hecher K; Kilby MD; Lewi L; Nicolaides KH; Oepkes D; Raine-Fenning N; Reed K; Salomon LJ; Sotiriadis A; Thilaganathan B; Ville Y
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Feb; 47(2):247-63. PubMed ID: 26577371
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of women's, providers' and ultrasound assessments of pregnancy duration among termination of pregnancy clients in South Africa.
    Blanchard K; Cooper D; Dickson K; Cullingworth L; Mavimbela N; von Mollendorf C; van Bogaert LJ; Winikoff B
    BJOG; 2007 May; 114(5):569-75. PubMed ID: 17439565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Routine ultrasound is the method of choice for dating pregnancy.
    Hutchon DJ
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1999 Jun; 106(6):616. PubMed ID: 10426634
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Ultrasound screening for fetal structural anomalies.
    Gomez KJ; Copel JA
    Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Apr; 5(2):204-10. PubMed ID: 8490090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Home pregnancy test compared to standard-of-care ultrasound dating in the assessment of pregnancy duration.
    Johnson S; Shaw R; Parkinson P; Ellis J; Buchanan P; Zinaman M
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2011 Feb; 27(2):393-401. PubMed ID: 21175374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of gestational age at birth based on last menstrual period and ultrasound during the first trimester.
    Hoffman CS; Messer LC; Mendola P; Savitz DA; Herring AH; Hartmann KE
    Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2008 Nov; 22(6):587-96. PubMed ID: 19000297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Methodological errors in the dating of pregnancy must be considered].
    Persson PH
    Lakartidningen; 2017 Oct; 114():. PubMed ID: 28972646
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Polish Gynecological Society--Ultrasound Section Guidelines on ultrasound screening in uncomplicated pregnancy (2 December 2011)].
    Sekcja Ultrasonografii Polskiego Towarzystwa Ginekologicznego
    Ginekol Pol; 2012 Apr; 83(4):309-15. PubMed ID: 22712266
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.