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.
3. Cervical carcinogenesis and contraception. Misra JS, Engineer AD, Das K, Tandon P. Diagn Cytopathol; 1991; 7(4):346-52. PubMed ID: 1935511 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Reversible contraception for the woman over 35 years of age. Archer DF. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Dec; 4(6):891-6. PubMed ID: 1450355 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Intrauterine devices: an effective alternative to oral hormonal contraception. Prescrire Int; 2009 Jun; 18(101):125-30. PubMed ID: 19637436 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Patient satisfaction with a levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implant. Reasons for and patterns of removal. Haugen MM, Evans CB, Kim MH. J Reprod Med; 1996 Nov; 41(11):849-54. PubMed ID: 8951137 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Cytopathologic changes associated with intrauterine contraceptive devices. A review of cervico-vaginal smears in 350 women. Pillay B, Gregory AR, Subbiah M. Med J Malaysia; 1994 Mar; 49(1):74-7. PubMed ID: 8057995 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Cellular composition of cervical smears in relation to the day of the menstrual cycle and the method of contraception. Vooijs GP, van der Graaf Y, Elias AG. Acta Cytol; 1987 Mar; 31(4):417-26. PubMed ID: 3604536 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of metabolic and inflammatory outcomes in women who used oral contraceptives and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device in a general population. Morin-Papunen L, Martikainen H, McCarthy MI, Franks S, Sovio U, Hartikainen AL, Ruokonen A, Leinonen M, Laitinen J, Järvelin MR, Pouta A. Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Nov; 199(5):529.e1-529.e10. PubMed ID: 18533124 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [The role of copper-releasing intrauterine device or levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on uterine bleeding and iron status (prospective study of 8 years)]. Imperato F, Perniola G, Mossa B, Marziani R, Perniola F, Stragapede B, Napolitano C. Minerva Ginecol; 2002 Jun; 54(3):271-8. PubMed ID: 12063443 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. [Comparative changes of exocervical exfoliative cytology in intrauterine device users]. Mossa B, Polli R, Lo Preiato A. Minerva Ginecol; 1986 Jun; 38(1-2):81-4. PubMed ID: 3960380 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Cytological evaluation and investigation of the vaginal flora of long-term users of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS). Lessard T, Simões JA, Discacciati MG, Hidalgo M, Bahamondes L. Contraception; 2008 Jan; 77(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 18082663 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Actinomyces in cervical smears of women using intrauterine contraceptive devices. Mali B, Joshi JV, Wagle U, Hazari K, Shah R, Chadha U, Gokral J, Bhave G. Acta Cytol; 1986 Jan; 30(4):367-71. PubMed ID: 3526779 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The Femilis LNG-IUS: contraceptive performance-an interim analysis. Wildemeersch D, Janssens D, Andrade A. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care; 2009 Apr; 14(2):103-10. PubMed ID: 19340705 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Long-term follow-up of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS). Emerson RE, Puzanov A, Brunnemer C, Younger C, Cramer H. Diagn Cytopathol; 2002 Sep; 27(3):153-7. PubMed ID: 12203862 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical evaluation of follow-up methods and results of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS) detected on cervicovaginal Pap smears. Kim TJ, Kim HS, Park CT, Park IS, Hong SR, Park JS, Shim JU. Gynecol Oncol; 1999 May; 73(2):292-8. PubMed ID: 10329049 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparative study of safety and efficacy of IUD insertions by physicians and nursing personnel in Brazil. Lassner KJ, Chen CH, Kropsch LA, Oberle MW, Lopes IM, Morris L. Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1995 Sep; 29(3):206-15. PubMed ID: 8520606 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]