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

3137 related items for PubMed ID: 19408970

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy.
    Caughey AB, Sundaram V, Kaimal AJ, Gienger A, Cheng YW, McDonald KM, Shaffer BL, Owens DK, Bravata DM.
    Ann Intern Med; 2009 Aug 18; 151(4):252-63, W53-63. PubMed ID: 19687492
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Association between timing of labor induction and neonatal and maternal outcomes: an observational study from China.
    Hu Y, Chen B, Wang X, Zhu S, Bao S, Lu J, Wang L, Wang W, Wu C, Qi L, Wang Y, Li F, Xie W, Wu Y, Hu L, Xia Y, Lou B, Guo R, Xie B, Chen X, Han Y, Chen D, Ma H, Liang Z.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM; 2024 Oct 18; 6(10):101456. PubMed ID: 39151749
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Maternal and newborn outcomes with elective induction of labor at term.
    Souter V, Painter I, Sitcov K, Caughey AB.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Mar 18; 220(3):273.e1-273.e11. PubMed ID: 30716284
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.
    Grobman WA, Caughey AB.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Oct 18; 221(4):304-310. PubMed ID: 30817905
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. [INDUCTION OF LABOR AT 39 WEEKS OF GESTATION VERSUS EXPECTANT MANAGEMENT].
    Sgayer I, Frank Wolf M.
    Harefuah; 2019 Dec 18; 158(12):802-806. PubMed ID: 31823535
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Timing of induction of labor in suspected macrosomia: retrospective cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Badr DA, Carlin A, Kadji C, Kang X, Cannie MM, Jani JC.
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2024 Oct 18; 64(4):443-452. PubMed ID: 38477187
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Elective induction of labor at term compared with expectant management: maternal and neonatal outcomes.
    Darney BG, Snowden JM, Cheng YW, Jacob L, Nicholson JM, Kaimal A, Dublin S, Getahun D, Caughey AB.
    Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Oct 18; 122(4):761-769. PubMed ID: 24084532
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Planned early delivery versus expectant management for hypertensive disorders from 34 weeks gestation to term.
    Cluver C, Novikova N, Koopmans CM, West HM.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2017 Jan 15; 1(1):CD009273. PubMed ID: 28106904
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Outcomes among Nulliparous Women Undergoing Nonmedically Indicated Induction of Labor at 39 Weeks Compared with Expectant Management Differ by Maternal Age.
    Hersh AR, Urbanowicz E, Garg B, Schmidt EM, Packer CH, Caughey AB.
    Am J Perinatol; 2024 May 15; 41(S 01):e1061-e1068. PubMed ID: 36452970
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    Henderson JT, Whitlock EP, O'Conner E, Senger CA, Thompson JH, Rowland MG.
    ; 2014 04 15. PubMed ID: 24783270
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 157.