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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

90 related items for PubMed ID: 1760063

  • 1. Hyperstimulation contraction stress tests: an evaluation of outcome by test pattern.
    Helm DA, Keegan KA, Porto M.
    Am J Perinatol; 1991 Sep; 8(5):304-7. PubMed ID: 1760063
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Continuing role of the nonstress test in the management of postdates pregnancy.
    Phelan JP, Platt LD, Yeh SY, Trujillo M, Paul RH.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1984 Nov; 64(5):624-8. PubMed ID: 6493655
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. [Value of endogenous uterine contraction stress test by breast nipple stimulation].
    Strowitzki T, Dollinger M, Schüssler B.
    Z Geburtshilfe Perinatol; 1990 Nov; 194(1):36-9. PubMed ID: 2316269
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Contraction stress test after hyperstimulation patterns during antepartum fetal heart rate monitoring.
    Elliott JP, Barry MK.
    J Reprod Med; 1988 Sep; 33(9):761-4. PubMed ID: 3172082
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Correlation of fetal heart rate decelerations following acoustic stimulation with perinatal outcome.
    Dunston-Boone G, Kuhlman K, Kaufmann M.
    Am J Perinatol; 1995 Sep; 12(5):342-6. PubMed ID: 8540939
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Characteristics of uterine activity during the breast stimulation stress test.
    Hill WC, Moenning RK, Katz M, Kitzmiller JL.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1984 Oct; 64(4):489-92. PubMed ID: 6483296
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Comparative study of stressed and nonstressed antepartum fetal heart rate testing.
    Keane MW, Horger EO, Vice L.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Mar; 57(3):320-4. PubMed ID: 7465146
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. [Abnormal fetal heart rate patterns associated with different labour managements and intrauterine resuscitation techniques].
    Verspyck E, Sentilhes L.
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2008 Feb; 37 Suppl 1():S56-64. PubMed ID: 18187267
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Contraction stress test by intermittent nipple stimulation.
    Huddleston JF, Sutliff G, Robinson D.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1984 May; 63(5):669-73. PubMed ID: 6717870
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. The fetal and labor outcome of 102 positive contraction stress tests.
    Odendaal HJ.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1979 Nov; 54(5):591-6. PubMed ID: 503388
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. [The influence of internal fetal monitoring on pregnancy outcome and survey of uterine contraction].
    Fan SR.
    Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 1993 Nov; 28(11):665-7, 701. PubMed ID: 8313735
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Abnormal fetal heart rate tracing patterns during the first stage of labor: effect on perinatal outcome.
    Hadar A, Sheiner E, Hallak M, Katz M, Mazor M, Shoham-Vardi I.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Oct; 185(4):863-8. PubMed ID: 11641667
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Antepartum fetal heart rate testing. II. Intrapartum fetal heart rate observation and newborn outcome following a positive contraction stress test.
    Gauthier RJ, Evertson LR, Paul RH.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1979 Jan 01; 133(1):34-9. PubMed ID: 760533
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Nonstress and contraction stress fetal heart rate monitoring. A randomized trial to determine which is the faster primary test.
    Newnham JP, Burns SE, Szczygielski C, Roberman B.
    J Reprod Med; 1988 Apr 01; 33(4):356-60. PubMed ID: 3367336
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Different types of variable decelerations and their effects to neonatal outcome.
    Kazandi M, Sendag F, Akercan F, Terek MC, Gundem G.
    Singapore Med J; 2003 May 01; 44(5):243-7. PubMed ID: 13677360
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring in low-risk pregnancies.
    Westgren M, Ingemarsson E, Ingemarsson I, Solum T.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1980 Sep 01; 56(3):301-4. PubMed ID: 7422168
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Central fetal monitoring: effect on perinatal outcomes and cesarean section rate.
    Withiam-Leitch M, Shelton J, Fleming E.
    Birth; 2006 Dec 01; 33(4):284-8. PubMed ID: 17150066
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Predictive value of the nonreactive nonstress test in evaluating neonatal outcome.
    Bhide A, Bhattacharya MS.
    J Postgrad Med; 1990 Apr 01; 36(2):104-5. PubMed ID: 2097363
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 5.