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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33144744)

  • 21. Elite rhetoric can undermine democratic norms.
    Clayton K; Davis NT; Nyhan B; Porter E; Ryan TJ; Wood TJ
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2021 Jun; 118(23):. PubMed ID: 34078668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Life expectancy and voting patterns in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
    Curtis LH; Hoffman MN; Califf RM; Hammill BG
    SSM Popul Health; 2021 Sep; 15():100840. PubMed ID: 34169139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Older voters and the 1992 presidential election.
    Binstock RH
    Gerontologist; 1992 Oct; 32(5):601-6. PubMed ID: 1427271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Testosterone fluctuations in response to a democratic election predict partisan attitudes toward the elected leader.
    Prasad S; Knight EL; Sarkar A; Welker KM; Lassetter B; Mehta PH
    Psychoneuroendocrinology; 2021 Nov; 133():105396. PubMed ID: 34508970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Should I vote-by-mail or in person? The impact of COVID-19 risk factors and partisanship on vote mode decisions in the 2020 presidential election.
    Atkeson LR; Hansen WL; Oliver MT; Maestas CD; Wiemer EC
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(9):e0274357. PubMed ID: 36107938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Improving election prediction internationally.
    Kennedy R; Wojcik S; Lazer D
    Science; 2017 Feb; 355(6324):515-520. PubMed ID: 28154078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Elections have Consequences: Partisan Politics may be Literally Killing Us.
    Maas A; Lu L
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2021 Jan; 19(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 33336326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Are We Rational or Not? The Exploration of Voter Choices during the 2016 Presidential and Legislative Elections in Taiwan.
    Lee IC; Chen EE; Yen NS; Tsai CH; Cheng HP
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():1762. PubMed ID: 29075215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Cognitive Reflection and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.
    Pennycook G; Rand DG
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2019 Feb; 45(2):224-239. PubMed ID: 29985107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The disastrous business of presidential campaigns: The effect of disaster declarations on presidential elections in FEMA Region 3.
    Balbuena K; Thornton TE; Baxter P; English W; Chen W
    J Emerg Manag; 2022; 20(6):535-559. PubMed ID: 36523196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A definition of the causal effect of a political party's nominee on the U.S. general presidential election using counterfactual response types.
    Garber MD; Collin LJ; Dana Flanders W
    Ann Epidemiol; 2020 Jul; 47():4-7. PubMed ID: 32713506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Driving fatalities on US presidential election days: a reanalysis.
    Zhang F; Aronow PM
    BMC Res Notes; 2016 Jul; 9():341. PubMed ID: 27411714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Partisan mathematical processing of political polling statistics: It's the expectations that count.
    Niemi L; Woodring M; Young L; Cordes S
    Cognition; 2019 May; 186():95-107. PubMed ID: 30769197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. U.S. Foreign Policy on the Verge of a New Path.
    Prikhodko OV
    Her Russ Acad Sci; 2021; 91(6):667-676. PubMed ID: 35125840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Visual priming and framing of the 2016 GOP and Democratic Party presidential primary debates.
    Stewart PA; Eubanks AD; Miller J
    Politics Life Sci; 2019 May; 38(1):14-31. PubMed ID: 31094672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Changes in subjective well-being following the U.S. Presidential election of 2016.
    Lench HC; Levine LJ; Perez KA; Carpenter ZK; Carlson SJ; Tibbett T
    Emotion; 2019 Feb; 19(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 29494200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. How an election loss leads to a social movement: Reactions to the 2016 U.S. presidential election among liberals predict later collective action and social movement identification.
    Bilali R; Godfrey EB; Freel SH
    Br J Soc Psychol; 2020 Jan; 59(1):227-247. PubMed ID: 31894871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Access to polling places in the 2004 Presidential election: the experience of one metropolitan midwestern city.
    Pohl PS; Froehlich-Grobe K; McKiernan B; Vacek KM; Donnelly M; Gaughan JG
    Am J Occup Ther; 2006; 60(4):404-8. PubMed ID: 16915870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Young adults' psychological and physiological reactions to the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
    Hoyt LT; Zeiders KH; Chaku N; Toomey RB; Nair RL
    Psychoneuroendocrinology; 2018 Jun; 92():162-169. PubMed ID: 29606376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The revolt of the Rust Belt: place and politics in the age of anger.
    McQuarrie M
    Br J Sociol; 2017 Nov; 68 Suppl 1():S120-S152. PubMed ID: 29114874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.