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

185 related items for PubMed ID: 4852831

  • 1. Letter: Intrauterine contraceptive devices.
    Watson DS.
    Med J Aust; 1974 May 18; 1(20):811. PubMed ID: 4852831
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Postpartum and postabortal insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices.
    Martorella LA, Esposito JM.
    J Reprod Med; 1975 Apr 18; 14(4):178-81. PubMed ID: 1142352
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 4. Intrauterine devices: an effective alternative to oral hormonal contraception.
    Prescrire Int; 2009 Jun 18; 18(101):125-30. PubMed ID: 19637436
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 6. Florida's experience with an intrauterine device for the nulliparous patients.
    Caraway AF.
    J Reprod Med; 1975 Sep 18; 15(3):114-6. PubMed ID: 1214252
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 9. Experience with three types of intrauterine device for contraception. At the clinic of the Delaware League for Planned Parenthood.
    Burdick CL, Andersen MV.
    Del Med J; 1973 Sep 18; 45(9):253-60. PubMed ID: 4746176
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. The Dalkon Shield debate.
    Goodhue PA.
    Conn Med; 1983 Mar 18; 47(3):138-41. PubMed ID: 6851548
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Comparison of continuation rates of intrauterine devices.
    Measham AR, Villegas A.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1976 Sep 18; 48(3):336-40. PubMed ID: 948377
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 13. [Analysis of 52 pregnancies with intrauterine devices].
    Olivas Mendoza G, Hernández JG, Noriega Prieto JS, Castro Velarde RI, Thomas Del Río G, Inda Silva A.
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 1981 Apr 18; 49(294):255-62. PubMed ID: 7327423
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. An association between the Dalkon Shield and complicated pregnancies among women hospitalized for intrauterine contraceptive device--related disorders.
    Kahn HS, Tyler CW.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1976 May 01; 125(1):83-6. PubMed ID: 1275008
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 16. [Postplacental application of 5 different types of intrauterine devices].
    Reynoso L, Arevalo N, Lara R, Aznar R.
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 1982 May 01; 50(301):107-10. PubMed ID: 7182224
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 19. Another look at the Dalkon Shield: meta-analysis underscores its problems.
    Sivin I.
    Contraception; 1993 Jul 01; 48(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 8403900
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 10.