217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31504142)
1. Industry Derived Occupational Exposure Limits: A Survey of Professionals on the Dutch System of Exposure Guidelines.
Schenk L; Visser MJ; Palmen NGM
Ann Work Expo Health; 2019 Nov; 63(9):1004-1012. PubMed ID: 31504142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A scoping survey of attitudes towards occupational exposure limits and REACH derived no effect levels for workers among chemical risk managers at Swedish workplaces.
Schenk L
Int J Occup Med Environ Health; 2020 Sep; 33(5):611-620. PubMed ID: 32699425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A comparison of REACH-derived no-effect levels for workers with EU indicative occupational exposure limit values and national limit values in Finland.
Tynkkynen S; Santonen T; Stockmann-Juvala H
Ann Occup Hyg; 2015 May; 59(4):401-15. PubMed ID: 25638729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Derived no-effect levels (DNELs) under the European chemicals regulation REACH--an analysis of long-term inhalation worker-DNELs presented by industry.
Schenk L; Deng U; Johanson G
Ann Occup Hyg; 2015 May; 59(4):416-38. PubMed ID: 25471229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A quantitative comparison of the safety margins in the european indicative occupational exposure limits and the derived no-effect levels for workers under REACH.
Schenk L; Johanson G
Toxicol Sci; 2011 Jun; 121(2):408-16. PubMed ID: 21389111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Will worker DNELs derived under the European REACH regulation extend the landscape of occupational exposure guidance values?
Schenk L; Johanson G
Arch Toxicol; 2019 May; 93(5):1187-1200. PubMed ID: 30993379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Throwing the baby out with the bath water? Occupational hygienists' views on the revised dutch system for occupational exposure limits.
Schenk L; Palmen NG
Ann Occup Hyg; 2013 Jun; 57(5):581-92. PubMed ID: 23253359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Global Landscape of Occupational Exposure Limits--Implementation of Harmonization Principles to Guide Limit Selection.
Deveau M; Chen CP; Johanson G; Krewski D; Maier A; Niven KJ; Ripple S; Schulte PA; Silk J; Urbanus JH; Zalk DM; Niemeier RW
J Occup Environ Hyg; 2015; 12 Suppl 1(sup1):S127-44. PubMed ID: 26099071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Misinterpretation and misuse of exposure limits.
Hewett P
Appl Occup Environ Hyg; 2001 Feb; 16(2):251-6. PubMed ID: 11217719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Extensive changes to occupational exposure limits in Korea.
Jeong JY; Choi S; Kho YL; Kim PG
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Nov; 58(2):345-8. PubMed ID: 20709131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An Assessment of the Robustness of the COSHH-Essentials (C-E) Target Airborne Concentration Ranges 15 Years on, and Their Usefulness for Determining Control Measures.
Vaughan NP; Rajan-Sithamparanadarajah R
Ann Work Expo Health; 2017 Apr; 61(3):270-283. PubMed ID: 28355421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Problems concerning the integration of "derived-no-effect-levels" (DNELS) into occupational safety and health regulations].
Gromiec J
Med Pr; 2008; 59(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 18663897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Development of worker inhalation derived no effect levels for tungsten compounds.
Jackson M; Lemus-Olalde R; Inhof C; Venezia C; Pardus M
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2013; 16(2):114-26. PubMed ID: 23682648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does industry take the susceptible subpopulation of asthmatic individuals into consideration when setting derived no-effect levels?
Johansson MK; Johanson G; Öberg M; Schenk L
J Appl Toxicol; 2016 Nov; 36(11):1379-91. PubMed ID: 27283874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Application of a framework for the selection of an appropriate occupational exposure limit for manganese.
Deveau M; Maier A; Krewski D
Neurotoxicology; 2017 Jan; 58():249-256. PubMed ID: 27663849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Interpreting REACH guidance in the determination of the derived no effect level (DNEL).
Kreider ML; Spencer Williams E
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Nov; 58(2):323-9. PubMed ID: 20655351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An interdisciplinary framework for derivation of occupational exposure limits.
Maurer LL; Alexander MS; Bachman AN; Grimm FA; Lewis RJ; North CM; Wojcik NC; Goyak KO
Front Public Health; 2022; 10():1038305. PubMed ID: 36530659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Derivation of occupational exposure limits: Differences in methods and protection levels.
Schneider K; Dilger M; Drossard C; Ott H; Kaiser E
J Appl Toxicol; 2022 May; 42(5):913-926. PubMed ID: 35188277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Occupational exposure limits: a comparative study.
Schenk L; Hansson SO; Rudén C; Gilek M
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Mar; 50(2):261-70. PubMed ID: 18226844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Comparative study on occupational exposure limits of chemical substances in workplace between GBZ 2.1 in China and ACGIH in USA].
Li W; Zhang M; Wang D
Zhonghua Lao Dong Wei Sheng Zhi Ye Bing Za Zhi; 2014 Jan; 32(1):1-26. PubMed ID: 24428986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
