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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11016670)

  • 1. Effect of test techniques of perfusion of neomycin sulfate patch tests. A comparative study with visual assessments.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E
    Contact Dermatitis; 2000 Nov; 43(5):283-94. PubMed ID: 11016670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Patch testing with neomycin sulfate.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E
    Contact Dermatitis; 2000 Nov; 43(5):295-302. PubMed ID: 11016671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effect of dark test-substance pigmentation on skin perfusion assessments and effect of test technique on balsam of Peru patch-test results.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E; Fischer T
    Contact Dermatitis; 2000 Jun; 42(6):318-25. PubMed ID: 10871094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of budesonide patch tests.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E; Fischer T
    Contact Dermatitis; 1999 Oct; 41(4):211-7. PubMed ID: 10515100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Visual and laser Doppler perfusion scanning assessments of Kathon CG patch test reactions.
    Bjarnason B; Fischer T
    Am J Contact Dermat; 1998 Dec; 9(4):224-30. PubMed ID: 9810023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Objective assessment of nickel sulfate patch test reactions with laser Doppler perfusion imaging.
    Bjarnason B; Fischer T
    Contact Dermatitis; 1998 Sep; 39(3):112-8. PubMed ID: 9771983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Assessment of balsam of Peru patch tests.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E; Fischer T
    Contact Dermatitis; 2000 Jun; 42(6):326-9. PubMed ID: 10871095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Objective non-invasive assessment of patch tests with the laser Doppler perfusion scanning technique.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E; Fischer T
    Contact Dermatitis; 1999 May; 40(5):251-60. PubMed ID: 10344480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Repeated open application tests (ROAT) in patients allergic to colophony--evaluated visually and with bioengineering techniques.
    Färm G
    Acta Derm Venereol; 1998 Mar; 78(2):130-5. PubMed ID: 9534892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Contact allergy to colophony. Clinical and experimental studies with emphasis on clinical relevance.
    Färm G
    Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh); 1998; 201():1-42. PubMed ID: 9833065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Reactivity at edges of corticosteroid patch tests may be an indicator of a strong positive test response.
    Bjarnason B; Flosadóttir E; Fischer T
    Dermatology; 1999; 199(2):130-4. PubMed ID: 10559578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The outcome of an additional patch-test reading on days 6 or 7.
    Jonker MJ; Bruynzeel DP
    Contact Dermatitis; 2000 Jun; 42(6):330-5. PubMed ID: 10871096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Delayed patch test reading after 5 days: the Mayo Clinic experience.
    Davis MD; Bhate K; Rohlinger AL; Farmer SA; Richardson DM; Weaver AL
    J Am Acad Dermatol; 2008 Aug; 59(2):225-33. PubMed ID: 18513826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Day 4 is better than day 3 for a single patch test reading.
    Todd DJ; Handley J; Metwali M; Allen GE; Burrows D
    Contact Dermatitis; 1996 Jun; 34(6):402-4. PubMed ID: 8879925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Pre-treatment of nickel test areas with sodium lauryl sulfate detects nickel sensitivity in subjects reacting negatively to routinely performed patch tests.
    Seidenari S; Motolese A; Belletti B
    Contact Dermatitis; 1996 Feb; 34(2):88-92. PubMed ID: 8681564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Patch testing with nickel sulfate: comparison between 2 nickel sulfate preparations and 2 different test sites on the back.
    Simonetti V; Manzini BM; Seidenari S
    Contact Dermatitis; 1998 Oct; 39(4):187-91. PubMed ID: 9817224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Outcome of a second patch test reading of TRUE Tests® on D6/7.
    Madsen JT; Andersen KE
    Contact Dermatitis; 2013 Feb; 68(2):94-7. PubMed ID: 23289880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Contact allergy in children referred for patch testing: North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 2001-2004.
    Zug KA; McGinley-Smith D; Warshaw EM; Taylor JS; Rietschel RL; Maibach HI; Belsito DV; Fowler JF; Storrs FJ; DeLeo VA; Marks JG; Mathias CG; Pratt MD; Sasseville D
    Arch Dermatol; 2008 Oct; 144(10):1329-36. PubMed ID: 18936397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quantification of allergic and irritant patch test reactions using ImageJ.
    Ohshima H; Kinoshita S; Futagawa M; Takiwaki H; Washizaki K; Ishiko A; Kanto H
    Skin Res Technol; 2014 May; 20(2):177-81. PubMed ID: 24118475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The reactivity of the back revisited. Are there differences in reactivity in different parts of the back?
    Björk AK; Bruze M; Engfeldt M; Nielsen C; Svedman C
    Contact Dermatitis; 2017 Jan; 76(1):19-26. PubMed ID: 27593358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.