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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16092270)

  • 1. Consumer preferences for food product quality attributes from Swedish agriculture.
    Carlsson F; Frykblom P; Lagerkvist CJ
    Ambio; 2005 Jun; 34(4-5):366-70. PubMed ID: 16092270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Choice Experiment Assessment of Consumer Preferences for Yogurt Products Attributes: Evidence from Taiwan.
    Chang MY; Huang CC; Du YC; Chen HS
    Nutrients; 2022 Aug; 14(17):. PubMed ID: 36079781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. How important is local food to organic-minded consumers?
    Hempel C; Hamm U
    Appetite; 2016 Jan; 96():309-318. PubMed ID: 26432955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Health Is Wealth: Study on Consumer Preferences and the Willingness to Pay for Ecological Agricultural Product Traceability Technology: Evidence from Jiangxi Province China.
    Chen X; Shang J; Zada M; Zada S; Ji X; Han H; Ariza-Montes A; Ramírez-Sobrino J
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Nov; 18(22):. PubMed ID: 34831514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Consumer Perception of Sustainability Attributes in Organic and Local Food.
    Annunziata A; Mariani A
    Recent Pat Food Nutr Agric; 2018; 9(2):87-96. PubMed ID: 29299996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluating consumer preferences for healthy eating from Community Kitchens in low-income urban areas: A discrete choice experiment of Comedores Populares in Peru.
    Buttorff C; Trujillo AJ; Diez-Canseco F; Bernabe-Ortiz A; Miranda JJ
    Soc Sci Med; 2015 Sep; 140():1-8. PubMed ID: 26184703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Are Low-Income Consumers Willing to Pay for Fortification of a Commercially Produced Yogurt in Bangladesh.
    Agnew J; Henson S; Cao Y
    Food Nutr Bull; 2020 Mar; 41(1):102-120. PubMed ID: 31992077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using the animal to the last bit: Consumer preferences for different beef cuts.
    Scozzafava G; Corsi AM; Casini L; Contini C; Loose SM
    Appetite; 2016 Jan; 96():70-79. PubMed ID: 26363423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Biotechnology to sustainability: Consumer preferences for food products grown on biodegradable mulches.
    Chen KJ; Marsh TL; Tozer PR; Galinato SP
    Food Res Int; 2019 Feb; 116():200-210. PubMed ID: 30716938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Traditional attributes moo-ve over for some consumer segments: Relative ranking of fluid milk attributes.
    Bir C; Widmar NO; Wolf C; Delgado MS
    Appetite; 2019 Mar; 134():162-171. PubMed ID: 30550891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Exploring the influence of consumer characteristics on veal credence and experience guarantee purchasing motivators.
    Resano H; Olaizola AM; Dominguez-Torreiro M
    Meat Sci; 2018 Jul; 141():1-8. PubMed ID: 29558696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Consumer attitudes and preferences towards pangasius and tilapia: The role of sustainability certification and the country of origin.
    Hinkes C; Schulze-Ehlers B
    Appetite; 2018 Aug; 127():171-181. PubMed ID: 29733863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Exploring consumers' attitude towards cultured meat in Italy.
    Mancini MC; Antonioli F
    Meat Sci; 2019 Apr; 150():101-110. PubMed ID: 30616073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Where's the beef? Retail channel choice and beef preferences in Argentina.
    Colella F; Ortega DL
    Meat Sci; 2017 Nov; 133():86-94. PubMed ID: 28662454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Can consumer food choices contribute to reduce environmental impact? The case of cisgenic apples.
    De Marchi E; Cavaliere A; Bacenetti J; Milani F; Pigliafreddo S; Banterle A
    Sci Total Environ; 2019 Sep; 681():155-162. PubMed ID: 31103653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Does Supplementary Information Add Value to Functional Food? Evidence from a Choice Experiment in China.
    Tian Y; Zhu H; Chen H
    Nutrients; 2022 Oct; 14(20):. PubMed ID: 36297108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Looking is buying. How visual attention and choice are affected by consumer preferences and properties of the supermarket shelf.
    Gidlöf K; Anikin A; Lingonblad M; Wallin A
    Appetite; 2017 Sep; 116():29-38. PubMed ID: 28433775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Promising ethical arguments for product differentiation in the organic food sector. A mixed methods research approach.
    Zander K; Stolz H; Hamm U
    Appetite; 2013 Mar; 62():133-42. PubMed ID: 23207189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The impact of interpretive and reductive front-of-pack labels on food choice and willingness to pay.
    Talati Z; Norman R; Pettigrew S; Neal B; Kelly B; Dixon H; Ball K; Miller C; Shilton T
    Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act; 2017 Dec; 14(1):171. PubMed ID: 29258543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessing Consumer Buy and Pay Preferences for Labeled Food Products with Statistical and Machine Learning Methods.
    Shen Y; Hamm JA; Gao F; Ryser ET; Zhang W
    J Food Prot; 2021 Sep; 84(9):1560-1566. PubMed ID: 33984134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.