Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:7767393rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0021027lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7767393lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0206012lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7767393lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0140430lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:issue1lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:dateCreated1995-7-6lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:abstractTextRoutine antenatal Rh immunoprophylaxis would substantially increase the use of anti-D Ig in the U.K. As availability of anti-D Ig is one factor influencing a decision to introduce routine antenatal prophylaxis, a trial was undertaken to test the efficacy of a lower dose of anti-D Ig than that used in earlier studies. RhD-negative primigravidae were randomized as controls or recipients of two doses of 250iu of anti-D Ig given at 28 and 34 weeks gestation. Blood samples were tested at delivery and at 6 months postpartum for the presence of immune anti-D, and again later if results were equivocal. Nine (1.5%) out of 595 control patients had immune anti-D at follow-up at 6 months and later; 4 (0.78%) of 513 treated women were immunized. It was concluded that, while two doses of 250iu of anti-D Ig may reduce alloimmunization, they are not as effective as two doses of 500iu in a previous trial.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:monthMarlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:issn0958-7578lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:authorpubmed-author:LebAAlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:authorpubmed-author:RawlinsonV...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:volume5lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:pagination15-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:dateRevised2008-7-31lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7767393-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7767393-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7767393-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7767393-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7767393-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7767393-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:year1995lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:articleTitleMulticentre trial of antepartum low-dose anti-D immunoglobulin.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:affiliationManchester Blood Centre, Plymouth Grove, U.K.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:publicationTypeClinical Triallld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:publicationTypeRandomized Controlled Triallld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7767393pubmed:publicationTypeMulticenter Studylld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:7767393lld:pubmed