|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Soft markers for genetic problemsFrom: Terry J DuBose (tjdubose@juno.com)Mon Oct 13 19:39:17 2003
I have it!, Thanks much... have a great time in the Bahamas. Terry ------------------------------------- On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:00:22 -0500 evsono@pipeline.com (art fougner, md) ------------------------------------- writes: -- ------------------------------------- > Terry > > Kypros Nicolaides has a good review on the subject of aneuploidy > detection in the "White Journal" - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and > Gynecology, Vol 21 Issue 4 pp 313 - 321. I think this may be what > you > need. > > Today i'm off celebrating Columbus' First Cruise to the Bahamas. > Cheers! > > art > > At Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Terry J. DuBose wrote: > > > >Good info. thanks very much. Terry > > > >ultrasound@obgyn.net writes: > >>It's better to use Likelihood ratio than PPV or NPV to eliminate > the problem > >>of the prevalence.++++ > >> > >>The Bayes's Theorem is the best tool. > >> > >>The best LR is nucal translucency in 1 st trimester and nasal > bones and > >>nuchal fold in the second trimester. > >> > >>But it seems that soft markers have a little signification after > the main > >>filter of 12 wa nucal translucency measurement. > >> > >>Ph coquel > > > >-- > >Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FSDMS, FAIUM > >Assistant Professor & Director, Diagnostic Medical Sonography > Program > >University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, CHRP > >4301 West Markham St. Mail Slot #563 > >Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205 USA > >501-686-6510 > >DuBoseTerryJ@UAMS.edu > >http://www.io.com/~dubose/ > >http://www.uams.edu/chrp/dms/default.asp > >http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm > > > > -- > art fougner, md > ich bin ein New Yorker >
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Sun Nov 2 05:20:38 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.