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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3160092)

  • 21. Theoretical understanding and methodological challenges in accessibility assessments, focusing the environmental component: an example from travel chains in urban public bus transport.
    Jensen G; Iwarsson S; Ståhl A
    Disabil Rehabil; 2002 Mar; 24(5):231-42. PubMed ID: 12004968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Income tax; expenditures to remove architectural and transportation barriers to handicapped and elderly: adoption of final regulations and deletion of temporary regulations.
    Fed Regist; 1979 Jul; 44(143):43269-73. PubMed ID: 10316850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility guidelines for buildings and facilities. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. Final guidelines.
    Fed Regist; 1991 Jul; 56(144):35408-542. PubMed ID: 10170773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Minimum guidelines and requirements for accessible design--Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. Proposed rule.
    Fed Regist; 1981 Aug; 46(149):39764-8. PubMed ID: 10251920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Directives for the transport of the handicapped -the sportive role of the health educator; a three phasic program in Baden-Württemberg].
    Schultze-Rhonhof C
    Int J Health Educ; 1978; 21(2):121-3. PubMed ID: 150714
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Transportation: a key to independent living.
    Bowe FG
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 1979 Oct; 60(10):483-6. PubMed ID: 496601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility guidelines for buildings and facilities; play areas. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. Final rule.
    Fed Regist; 2000 Oct; 65(202):62498-529. PubMed ID: 11503682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Barriers to health and wellness from a disability perspective.
    Kaplan D; Litvak S
    J Gend Specif Med; 2002; 5(2):9-12. PubMed ID: 11974681
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Self-determination of the disabled (author's transl)].
    Fritsch M
    Rehabilitation (Stuttg); 1981 May; 20(2):65-8. PubMed ID: 6454937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Towards Standardised Information Exchange Regarding the Accessibility of Public Transport in Germany.
    Heck H; Wallbruch R
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2017; 242():695-702. PubMed ID: 28873873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Ambulatory services for handicapped. Possibilities and opportunities for their actualization].
    Schreyer J
    Krankenpflege (Frankf); 1979 Nov; 33(11):382-3. PubMed ID: 229321
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Moving towards better health: a survey of transport authorities and primary care trusts in South West England.
    Akerman P
    Public Health; 2006 Mar; 120(3):213-20. PubMed ID: 16360713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Turtle: a prototype, real time, public transport information system focused on the needs of disabled older people.
    Mullis VJ; Littlejohn JM
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 1998; 48():235-9. PubMed ID: 10186518
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Designing plumbing systems for the handicapped.
    Newfeld H
    Consult Specif Eng; 1988 Apr; 3(4):98-100. PubMed ID: 10318053
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Barrier-free design--making the environment accessible to the disabled.
    Bérubé B
    Can Med Assoc J; 1981 Jan; 124(1):68-78. PubMed ID: 6450633
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. National population policies in industrial countries: praxis or paradox?
    Leeuw F; Van De Vall M
    Comp Soc Res; 1984; 7():351-68. PubMed ID: 12340265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Assessing raters' policies in evaluating proposed services for transporting the physically handicapped.
    Allen JS; Muchinsky PM
    J Appl Psychol; 1984 Feb; 69(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 6230345
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The evolution of government independent living policies and programmes for Canadians with disabilities.
    Dunn P
    Int J Rehabil Res; 2002 Sep; 25(3):215-24. PubMed ID: 12352175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Improving return-to-work strategies in the United States disability programs, with analysis of program practices in Germany and Sweden.
    Sim J
    Soc Secur Bull; 1999; 62(3):41-50. PubMed ID: 10732370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Designing the site to meet barrier-free goals.
    Steinfeld E
    Archit Rec; 1979 May; 165(5):69-71. PubMed ID: 10316843
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.