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 *

99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14668110)

  • 21. Attitudes toward environmental hazards: where do toxic wastes fit?
    Burger J; Martin M; Cooper K; Gochfeld M
    J Toxicol Environ Health; 1997 Jun; 51(2):109-21. PubMed ID: 9176552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Resident's concerns and attitudes towards Solid Waste Management facilities.
    Rahardyan B; Matsuto T; Kakuta Y; Tanaka N
    Waste Manag; 2004; 24(5):437-51. PubMed ID: 15120428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Examining localized patterns of air quality perception in Texas: a spatial and statistical analysis.
    Brody SD; Peck BM; Highfield WE
    Risk Anal; 2004 Dec; 24(6):1561-74. PubMed ID: 15660612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Promoting safe drinking water.
    Pike-MacDonald S; Best DG; Twomey C; Bennett L; Blakeley J
    Can Nurse; 2007 Jan; 103(1):14-9. PubMed ID: 17269579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Contaminated Department of Energy facilities and ecosystems: weighing the ecological risks.
    Burger J
    J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2000 Sep; 61(2):141-54. PubMed ID: 11032427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Review of the U.S. Army's health risk assessments for oral exposure to six chemical-warfare agents. Introduction.
    J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2000 Mar; 59(5-6):281-526. PubMed ID: 10742829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Indicators of waste management efficiency related to different territorial conditions.
    Passarini F; Vassura I; Monti F; Morselli L; Villani B
    Waste Manag; 2011 Apr; 31(4):785-92. PubMed ID: 21216584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Before the storm: informing and involving stakeholder groups in workplace biomarker monitoring.
    Musham C; Trettin L; Jablonski R
    J Public Health Policy; 1999; 20(3):319-34. PubMed ID: 10874405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Conceptual site models as a tool in evaluating ecological health: the case of the Department of Energy's Amchitka Island nuclear test site.
    Burger J; Mayer HJ; Greenberg M; Powers CW; Volz CD; Gochfeld M
    J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2006 Jul; 69(13):1217-38. PubMed ID: 16754537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Is epidemiology the key to cumulative risk assessment?
    Levy JI
    Risk Anal; 2008 Dec; 28(6):1507-13. PubMed ID: 18793279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, Part III: nanoscale technologies for assessing risk and improving public health.
    Balshaw DM; Philbert M; Suk WA
    Toxicol Sci; 2005 Dec; 88(2):298-306. PubMed ID: 16162851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Recent developments in the application of risk analysis to waste technologies.
    Pollard SJ; Smith R; Longhurst PJ; Eduljee GH; Hall D
    Environ Int; 2006 Dec; 32(8):1010-20. PubMed ID: 16860388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Development of a preliminary relative risk model for evaluating regional ecological conditions in the Delaware River Estuary, USA.
    Iannuzzi TJ; Durda JL; Preziosi DV; Ludwig DF; Stahl RG; DeSantis AA; Hoke RA
    Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2010 Jan; 6(1):164-79. PubMed ID: 19689170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Methodology for integrated assessment of anthropogenic and socioeconomic factors in the formation of a human health risk].
    Boev VM
    Gig Sanit; 2009; (4):4-8. PubMed ID: 19802939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Environmental and human exposure assessment monitoring of communities near an abandoned mercury mine in the Philippines: a toxic legacy.
    Maramba NP; Reyes JP; Francisco-Rivera AT; Panganiban LC; Dioquino C; Dando N; Timbang R; Akagi H; Castillo MT; Quitoriano C; Afuang M; Matsuyama A; Eguchi T; Fuchigami Y
    J Environ Manage; 2006 Oct; 81(2):135-45. PubMed ID: 16949727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Naturally occurring asbestos: a recurring public policy challenge.
    Lee RJ; Strohmeier BR; Bunker KL; Van Orden DR
    J Hazard Mater; 2008 May; 153(1-2):1-21. PubMed ID: 18180100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Chemicals of emerging concern in the Great Lakes Basin: an analysis of environmental exposures.
    Klecka G; Persoon C; Currie R
    Rev Environ Contam Toxicol; 2010; 207():1-93. PubMed ID: 20652664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Evaluation of factors affecting stakeholder risk perception of contaminated sediment disposal in Oslo harbor.
    Sparrevik M; Ellen GJ; Duijn M
    Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Jan; 45(1):118-24. PubMed ID: 20809566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Evaluating public participation in environmental decision-making: EPA's superfund community involvement program.
    Charnley S; Engelbert B
    J Environ Manage; 2005 Nov; 77(3):165-82. PubMed ID: 16112794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Bottom-up and top-down integration of human and ecological risk assessment.
    Suter GW
    J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2004 Apr 23-May 28; 67(8-10):779-90. PubMed ID: 15192868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.