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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10219895)

  • 1. Comparison of the Quintest to the lancet in allergic skin testing.
    Carrozzi FM; Byth K; Katelaris CH
    Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol; 1998 Dec; 16(4):149-54. PubMed ID: 10219895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of two skin test methodologies and allergens from two different manufacturers.
    Rhodius R; Wickens K; Cheng S; Crane J
    Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol; 2002 Apr; 88(4):374-9. PubMed ID: 11991555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of six epicutaneous devices in the performance of immediate hypersensitivity skin testing.
    Adinoff AD; Rosloniec DM; McCall LL; Nelson HS
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1989 Aug; 84(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 2760359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of devices for skin prick testing.
    Nelson HS; Lahr J; Buchmeier A; McCormick D
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1998 Feb; 101(2 Pt 1):153-6. PubMed ID: 9500746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the Multi-Test device for immediate hypersensitivity skin testing.
    Berkowitz RB; Tinkelman DG; Lutz C; Crummie A; Smith K
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1992 Dec; 90(6 Pt 1):979-85. PubMed ID: 1460201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of a new lancet and a hypodermic needle for skin prick testing.
    Dirksen A; Mosbech H; Søborg M; Biering I
    Allergy; 1983 Jul; 38(5):359-62. PubMed ID: 6614408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of three methods for using the Duotip-Test device for skin testing.
    Sangsupawanich P; Chamnanphol S; Koonrungsrisomboon D
    Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol; 2000 Sep; 18(3):153-6. PubMed ID: 11270470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparative performance of five commercial prick skin test devices.
    Nelson HS; Rosloniec DM; McCall LI; Iklé D
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1993 Nov; 92(5):750-6. PubMed ID: 8227867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparative performance for immediate hypersensitivity skin testing using two skin prick test devices.
    Rizzo MC; Naspitz CK; Solé D
    J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol; 1995; 5(6):354-6. PubMed ID: 8653226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pain perception and performance of three devices for single-site allergen skin testing.
    Nelson HS; Lopez P; Curran-Everett D
    Allergy Asthma Proc; 2014; 35(1):63-5. PubMed ID: 24433598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Lancet Weight Determines Wheal Diameter in Response to Skin Prick Testing with Histamine.
    Andersen HH; Lundgaard AC; Petersen AS; Hauberg LE; Sharma N; Hansen SD; Elberling J; Arendt-Nielsen L
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0156211. PubMed ID: 27213613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Skin prick testing using allergen-coated lancets: a comparison between a multiple lancet device and a single lancet applied with varying pressures.
    Phagoo SB; Wilson NM; Silverman M
    Clin Exp Allergy; 1991 Sep; 21(5):589-93. PubMed ID: 1742651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Skin prick test responses to codeine, histamine, and ragweed utilizing the Multitest device.
    Lin RY; Erlich ER; Don PC
    Ann Allergy; 1990 Sep; 65(3):222-6. PubMed ID: 2403228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The results of skin prick testing in patients with allergic rhinitis: a comparison between a multiple lancet device and a single lancet.
    Ateş A; Kinikli G; Turgay M; Aydoğan N; Duman M
    Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol; 2004; 22(2-3):109-14. PubMed ID: 15565947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of intradermal dilutional testing, skin prick testing, and modified quantitative testing for common allergens.
    Peltier J; Ryan MW
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2007 Aug; 137(2):246-9. PubMed ID: 17666250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of five techniques of skin prick tests used routinely in Europe.
    Masse MS; Granger Vallée A; Chiriac A; Dhivert-Donnadieu H; Bousquet-Rouanet L; Bousquet PJ; Demoly P
    Allergy; 2011 Nov; 66(11):1415-9. PubMed ID: 21797883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Positive Multi-Test reactions do not cause false positive reactions at adjacent sites.
    Garibaldi E; Slavin RG
    Ann Allergy; 1990 Dec; 65(6):481-4. PubMed ID: 2256578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Validity and reproducibility of multi-test skin test device.
    Mahan C; Spectror S; Siegel S; Rachelefsky G; Katz R; Rohr A
    Ann Allergy; 1993 Jul; 71(1):25-8. PubMed ID: 8328708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Variables in allergy skin testing.
    Nelson HS
    Allergy Proc; 1994; 15(6):265-8. PubMed ID: 7721073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Diagnostic possibilities using RAST. Correlation with three various skin extracts].
    Jarisch R
    Hautarzt; 1976 Feb; 27(2):64-7. PubMed ID: 1254473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.