BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20738819)

  • 1. The impact of consumer phase models in microbial risk analysis.
    Nauta M; Christensen B
    Risk Anal; 2011 Feb; 31(2):255-65. PubMed ID: 20738819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of risk assessments on Campylobacter in broiler meat.
    Nauta M; Hill A; Rosenquist H; Brynestad S; Fetsch A; van der Logt P; Fazil A; Christensen B; Katsma E; Borck B; Havelaar A
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2009 Feb; 129(2):107-23. PubMed ID: 19136176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quantitative risk assessment of Campylobacter spp. in poultry based meat preparations as one of the factors to support the development of risk-based microbiological criteria in Belgium.
    Uyttendaele M; Baert K; Ghafir Y; Daube G; De Zutter L; Herman L; Dierick K; Pierard D; Dubois JJ; Horion B; Debevere J
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2006 Sep; 111(2):149-63. PubMed ID: 16876277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quantitative risk assessment of thermophilic Campylobacter spp. and cross-contamination during handling of raw broiler chickens evaluating strategies at the producer level to reduce human campylobacteriosis in Sweden.
    Lindqvist R; Lindblad M
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2008 Jan; 121(1):41-52. PubMed ID: 18037525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A poultry-processing model for quantitative microbiological risk assessment.
    Nauta M; van der Fels-Klerx I; Havelaar A
    Risk Anal; 2005 Feb; 25(1):85-98. PubMed ID: 15787759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Human campylobacteriosis related to cross-contamination during handling of raw chicken meat: Application of quantitative risk assessment to guide intervention scenarios analysis in the Australian context.
    Habib I; Coles J; Fallows M; Goodchild S
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2020 Nov; 332():108775. PubMed ID: 32645510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Use of results of microbiological analyses for risk-based control of Listeria monocytogenes in marinated broiler legs.
    Aarnisalo K; Vihavainen E; Rantala L; Maijala R; Suihko ML; Hielm S; Tuominen P; Ranta J; Raaska L
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2008 Feb; 121(3):275-84. PubMed ID: 18155311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Monitoring and risk assessment of campylobacter infections].
    Bartelt E
    Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr; 2004 Aug; 111(8):326-31. PubMed ID: 15469062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cross-contamination versus undercooking of poultry meat or eggs - which risks need to be managed first?
    Luber P
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2009 Aug; 134(1-2):21-8. PubMed ID: 19272666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effectiveness and efficiency of controlling Campylobacter on broiler chicken meat.
    Havelaar AH; Mangen MJ; de Koeijer AA; Bogaardt MJ; Evers EG; Jacobs-Reitsma WF; van Pelt W; Wagenaar JA; de Wit GA; van der Zee H; Nauta MJ
    Risk Anal; 2007 Aug; 27(4):831-44. PubMed ID: 17958495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Risk profiles of pork and poultry meat and risk ratings of various pathogen/product combinations.
    Mataragas M; Skandamis PN; Drosinos EH
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2008 Aug; 126(1-2):1-12. PubMed ID: 18602180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A risk assessment model for Campylobacter in broiler meat.
    Nauta MJ; Jacobs-Reitsma WF; Havelaar AH
    Risk Anal; 2007 Aug; 27(4):845-61. PubMed ID: 17958496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A model of hygiene practices and consumption patterns in the consumer phase.
    Christensen BB; Rosenquist H; Sommer HM; Nielsen NL; Fagt S; Andersen NL; Nørrung B
    Risk Anal; 2005 Feb; 25(1):49-60. PubMed ID: 15787756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of the "testing and scheduling" strategy for control of Campylobacter in broiler meat in The Netherlands.
    Nauta MJ; van der Wal FJ; Putirulan FF; Post J; van de Kassteele J; Bolder NM
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2009 Sep; 134(3):216-22. PubMed ID: 19674803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cross-contamination during food preparation: a mechanistic model applied to chicken-borne Campylobacter.
    Mylius SD; Nauta MJ; Havelaar AH
    Risk Anal; 2007 Aug; 27(4):803-13. PubMed ID: 17958493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. PCR assay for the detection of Campylobacter in marinated and non-marinated poultry products.
    Katzav M; Isohanni P; Lund M; Hakkinen M; Lyhs U
    Food Microbiol; 2008 Oct; 25(7):908-14. PubMed ID: 18721681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Risk based microbiological criteria for Campylobacter in broiler meat in the European Union.
    Nauta MJ; Sanaa M; Havelaar AH
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2012 Sep; 158(3):209-17. PubMed ID: 22877637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Processing practices contributing to Campylobacter contamination in Belgian chicken meat preparations.
    Sampers I; Habib I; Berkvens D; Dumoulin A; Zutter LD; Uyttendaele M
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2008 Dec; 128(2):297-303. PubMed ID: 18947895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Microbiological risk assessment models for partitioning and mixing during food handling.
    Nauta MJ
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2005 Apr; 100(1-3):311-22. PubMed ID: 15854714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Campylobacter in primary animal production and control strategies to reduce the burden of human campylobacteriosis.
    Wagenaar JA; Mevius DJ; Havelaar AH
    Rev Sci Tech; 2006 Aug; 25(2):581-94. PubMed ID: 17094699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.