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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28234692)

  • 1. Dose Comparisons for a Site-specific Representative Person Using the Age-dependent Dose Coefficients in CAP88-PC Version 4.
    Stagich BH; Moore KR; Newton JR; Dixon KL; Jannik GT
    Health Phys; 2017 Apr; 112(4):338-342. PubMed ID: 28234692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's CAP88 PC Versions 3.0 and 4.0.
    Jannik T; Farfan EB; Dixon K; Newton J; Sailors C; Johnson L; Moore K; Stahman R
    Health Phys; 2015 Aug; 109(2 Suppl 2):S169-75. PubMed ID: 26102326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of the Current Center of Site Annual Neshap Dose Modeling at the Savannah River Site with Other Assessment Methods.
    Minter KM; Jannik GT; Stagich BH; Dixon KL; Newton JR
    Health Phys; 2018 Apr; 114(4):408-413. PubMed ID: 29481531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of radionuclide databases in CAP88 mainframe version 1.0 and Windows-based version 3.0.
    LaBone ED; Farfán EB; Lee PL; Jannik GT; Donnelly EH; Foley TQ
    Health Phys; 2009 Sep; 97(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 19667807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparison of dose results from the Clean Air Act Assessment Package-1988, personal computer (CAP88-PC), version 3 to previous versions.
    Rhoads K; Snyder S; Staven L
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S125-39. PubMed ID: 23803666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of CAP88 PC Ver. 3.0 and MAXDOSE dose assessment models involving co-located stack releases at the Savannah River site.
    Farfán E; Jannik GT; Lee P; Powell A
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S158-63. PubMed ID: 23803669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Site-specific reference person parameters and derived concentration standards for the Savannah River Site.
    Stone DK; Higley KA; Jannik GT
    Health Phys; 2014 May; 106(5 Suppl 2):S59-64. PubMed ID: 24667386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Modeling Considerations for Ingestion Pathway Dose Calculations Using CAP88.
    Stuenkel D
    Health Phys; 2017 Apr; 112(4):343-351. PubMed ID: 28234693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. CAP88-PC tritium ingestion model inconsistencies.
    Simpkins AA
    Health Phys; 2001 Nov; 81(5 Suppl):S75-7. PubMed ID: 11669197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Gamma-Ray Dose From an Overhead Plume.
    McNaughton MW; Gillis JM; Ruedig E; Whicker JJ; Fuehne DP
    Health Phys; 2017 May; 112(5):445-450. PubMed ID: 28350698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Use of CAP88 at Department of Energy sites.
    Snyder S; Vázquez G; Hay T
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S164-8. PubMed ID: 23803670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Factors that elevate the internal radionuclide and chemical retention, dose and health risks to infants and children in a radiological-nuclear emergency.
    Richardson RB
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2009 Jun; 134(3-4):167-80. PubMed ID: 19460847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessing the possible radiological impact of routine radiological discharges from proposed nuclear power stations in England and Wales.
    Jones A; Jones K; Holmes S; Ewers L; Cabianca T
    J Radiol Prot; 2013 Mar; 33(1):163-74. PubMed ID: 23295273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Basis and implications of the CAP88 age-specific dose coefficients.
    Leggett R; Scofield P; Eckerman K
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S149-57. PubMed ID: 23803668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Validation test for CAP88 predictions of tritium dispersion at Los Alamos National Laboratory.
    Michelotti E; Green A; Whicker J; Eisele W; Fuehne D; McNaughton M
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S176-81. PubMed ID: 23803672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. ICRP dose coefficients: computational development and current status.
    Bolch WE; Petoussi-Henss N; Paquet F; Harrison J
    Ann ICRP; 2016 Jun; 45(1 Suppl):156-77. PubMed ID: 27048756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A best fit approach to estimating multiple diffuse source terms using ambient air monitoring data and an air dispersion model.
    MacQueen D; Bertoldo N; Wegrecki A
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S140-8. PubMed ID: 23803667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. CAP88-PC Version 4, an updated radionuclide NESHAPS model.
    Wood R; Stuenkel D; Rosnick R
    Health Phys; 2013 Aug; 105(2 Suppl 2):S169-75. PubMed ID: 23803671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Six methods to assess potential radioactive air emissions from a stack.
    Barnett JM; Davis WE
    Health Phys; 1996 Nov; 71(5):773-8. PubMed ID: 8887527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effective dose conversion coefficients for health care provider exposed to pediatric and adult victims in radiological dispersal device incident.
    Han EY; Ha WH; Jin YW; Bolch WE; Lee C
    J Radiol Prot; 2015 Mar; 35(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 25502317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.