196 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12442991)
1. Assessing human health response in life cycle assessment using ED10s and DALYs: part 2--Noncancer effects.
Pennington D; Crettaz P; Tauxe A; Rhomberg L; Brand K; Jolliet O
Risk Anal; 2002 Oct; 22(5):947-63. PubMed ID: 12442991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessing human health response in life cycle assessment using ED10s and DALYs: part 1--Cancer effects.
Crettaz P; Pennington D; Rhomberg L; Brand K; Jolliet O
Risk Anal; 2002 Oct; 22(5):931-46. PubMed ID: 12442990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Life cycle impact assessment: a challenge for risk analysts.
Matthews HS; Lave L; MacLean H
Risk Anal; 2002 Oct; 22(5):853-60. PubMed ID: 12442984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The benchmark dose method--review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment.
Filipsson AF; Sand S; Nilsson J; Victorin K
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2003; 33(5):505-42. PubMed ID: 14594105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Determination of a site-specific reference dose for methylmercury for fish-eating populations.
Shipp AM; Gentry PR; Lawrence G; Van Landingham C; Covington T; Clewell HJ; Gribben K; Crump K
Toxicol Ind Health; 2000 Nov; 16(9-10):335-438. PubMed ID: 11762928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Quantitative approaches to human risk assessment for noncancer health effects.
Kimmel CA
Neurotoxicology; 1990; 11(2):189-98. PubMed ID: 2234540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Calculation of the disease burden associated with environmental chemical exposures: application of toxicological information in health economic estimation.
Grandjean P; Bellanger M
Environ Health; 2017 Dec; 16(1):123. PubMed ID: 29202828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A unified approach to risk assessment for cancer and noncancer endpoints based on benchmark doses and uncertainty/safety factors.
Gaylor DW; Kodell RL; Chen JJ; Krewski D
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1999 Apr; 29(2 Pt 1):151-7. PubMed ID: 10341145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Integrating site-specific dispersion modeling into life cycle assessment, with a focus on inhalation risks in chemical production.
Tian S; Bilec M
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2018 Nov; 68(11):1224-1238. PubMed ID: 29985784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. US EPA's acute reference exposure methodology for acute inhalation exposures.
Strickland JA; Foureman GL
Sci Total Environ; 2002 Apr; 288(1-2):51-63. PubMed ID: 12013548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Estimating noncancer uncertainty factors: are ratios NOAELs informative?
Brand KP; Rhomberg L; Evans JS
Risk Anal; 1999 Apr; 19(2):295-308. PubMed ID: 10765406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Basis for a proposed reference dose (RfD) for dioxin of 1-10 pg/kg-day: a weight of evidence evaluation of the human and animal studies.
Greene JF; Hays S; Paustenbach D
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(2):115-59. PubMed ID: 12554432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. An approach for modeling noncancer dose responses with an emphasis on uncertainty.
Price PS; Keenan RE; Swartout JC; Gillis CA; Carlson-Lynch H; Dourson ML
Risk Anal; 1997 Aug; 17(4):427-37. PubMed ID: 9323872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of potential risk levels associated with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reference values.
Castorina R; Woodruff TJ
Environ Health Perspect; 2003 Aug; 111(10):1318-25. PubMed ID: 12896853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Intake fraction for multimedia pollutants: a tool for life cycle analysis and comparative risk assessment.
Bennett DH; Margni MD; McKone TE; Jolliet O
Risk Anal; 2002 Oct; 22(5):905-18. PubMed ID: 12442988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A straw man proposal for a quantitative definition of the RfD.
Hattis D; Baird S; Goble R
Drug Chem Toxicol; 2002 Nov; 25(4):403-36. PubMed ID: 12378950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Identification of novel uncertainty factors and thresholds of toxicological concern for health hazard and risk assessment: Application to cleaning product ingredients.
Wang Z; Scott WC; Williams ES; Ciarlo M; DeLeo PC; Brooks BW
Environ Int; 2018 Apr; 113():357-376. PubMed ID: 29452931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quantitative estimates of risk for noncancer endpoints.
Clewell HJ; Crump KS
Risk Anal; 2005 Apr; 25(2):285-9. PubMed ID: 15876204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Next generation testing strategy for assessment of genomic damage: A conceptual framework and considerations.
Dearfield KL; Gollapudi BB; Bemis JC; Benz RD; Douglas GR; Elespuru RK; Johnson GE; Kirkland DJ; LeBaron MJ; Li AP; Marchetti F; Pottenger LH; Rorije E; Tanir JY; Thybaud V; van Benthem J; Yauk CL; Zeiger E; Luijten M
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2017 Jun; 58(5):264-283. PubMed ID: 27650663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The work environment disability-adjusted life year for use with life cycle assessment: a methodological approach.
Scanlon KA; Gray GM; Francis RA; Lloyd SM; LaPuma P
Environ Health; 2013 Mar; 12():21. PubMed ID: 23497039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
