153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11767939)
1. Setting occupational exposure limits for sensory irritants: the approach in the European Union.
Meldrum M
AIHAJ; 2001; 62(6):730-2. PubMed ID: 11767939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Approach to setting occupational exposure limits for sensory irritants in The Netherlands.
Feron VJ; Art JH; Mojet J
AIHAJ; 2001; 62(6):733-5. PubMed ID: 11767940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Approaches and considerations for setting occupational exposure limits for sensory irritants: report of recent symposia.
Paustenbach D
AIHAJ; 2001; 62(6):697-704. PubMed ID: 11767934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluating the human response to sensory irritation: implications for setting occupational exposure limits.
Dalton P
AIHAJ; 2001; 62(6):723-9. PubMed ID: 11767938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A proposed approach for setting occupational exposure limits for sensory irritants based on chemosensory models.
Gaffney SH; Paustenbach DJ
Ann Occup Hyg; 2007 Jun; 51(4):345-56. PubMed ID: 17602208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Are occupational exposure limits becoming more alike within the European Union?
Schenk L; Hansson SO; Rudén C; Gilek M
J Appl Toxicol; 2008 Oct; 28(7):858-66. PubMed ID: 18381691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Local effects in the respiratory tract: relevance of subjectively measured irritation for setting occupational exposure limits.
Arts JH; de Heer C; Woutersen RA
Int Arch Occup Environ Health; 2006 Apr; 79(4):283-98. PubMed ID: 16283365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Biological monitoring and Biological Limit Values (BLV): the strategy of the European Union.
Bolt HM; Thier R
Toxicol Lett; 2006 Apr; 162(2-3):119-24. PubMed ID: 16326051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation and application of the RD50 for determining acceptable exposure levels of airborne sensory irritants for the general public.
Kuwabara Y; Alexeeff GV; Broadwin R; Salmon AG
Environ Health Perspect; 2007 Nov; 115(11):1609-16. PubMed ID: 18007993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The role of odor and irritation, as well as risk perception, in the setting of occupational exposure limits.
Paustenbach DJ; Gaffney SH
Int Arch Occup Environ Health; 2006 Apr; 79(4):339-42. PubMed ID: 16049719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Approaches for the development of occupational exposure limits for man-made mineral fibres (MMMFs).
Ziegler-Skylakakis K
Mutat Res; 2004 Sep; 553(1-2):37-41. PubMed ID: 15288531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of airborne sensory irritants for setting exposure limits or guidelines: A systematic approach.
Nielsen GD; Wolkoff P
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2017 Nov; 90():308-317. PubMed ID: 28911939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Will worker DNELs derived under the European REACH regulation extend the landscape of occupational exposure guidance values?
Schenk L; Johanson G
Arch Toxicol; 2019 May; 93(5):1187-1200. PubMed ID: 30993379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sensory irritation as a basis for setting occupational exposure limits.
Brüning T; Bartsch R; Bolt HM; Desel H; Drexler H; Gundert-Remy U; Hartwig A; Jäckh R; Leibold E; Pallapies D; Rettenmeier AW; Schlüter G; Stropp G; Sucker K; Triebig G; Westphal G; van Thriel C
Arch Toxicol; 2014 Oct; 88(10):1855-79. PubMed ID: 25182421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Derivation of an occupational exposure limit for inorganic borates using a weight of evidence approach.
Maier A; Vincent M; Hack E; Nance P; Ball W
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2014 Apr; 68(3):424-37. PubMed ID: 24525063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A recommended occupational exposure limit for formaldehyde based on irritation.
Paustenbach D; Alarie Y; Kulle T; Schachter N; Smith R; Swenberg J; Witschi H; Horowitz SB
J Toxicol Environ Health; 1997 Feb; 50(3):217-63. PubMed ID: 9055874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A quantitative comparison of the safety margins in the european indicative occupational exposure limits and the derived no-effect levels for workers under REACH.
Schenk L; Johanson G
Toxicol Sci; 2011 Jun; 121(2):408-16. PubMed ID: 21389111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. OELs derivation in Poland and in the former Eastern Bloc with reference to approaches and practices applied in the EU.
Soćko R; Czerczak S; Kupczewska-Dobecka M
Med Pr; 2015; 66(3):383-92. PubMed ID: 26325051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Sensory irritation due to methyl-2-cyanoacrylate, ethyl-2-cyanoacrylate, isopropyl-2-cyanoacrylate and 2-methoxyethyl-2-cyanoacrylate in mice.
Gagnaire F; Marignac B; Morel G; Nunge H; Grossmann S
Ann Occup Hyg; 2003 Jun; 47(4):297-304. PubMed ID: 12765870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Approaches to understanding chemosensory responses: new directions and new caveats.
Kendal-Reed M
AIHAJ; 2001; 62(6):717-22. PubMed ID: 11767937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
