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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33777248)

  • 1. Assessing the accuracy of low-cost optical particle sensors using a physics-based approach.
    Hagan DH; Kroll JH
    Atmos Meas Tech; 2020; 13(11):6343-6355. PubMed ID: 33777248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessing the value of complex refractive index and particle density for calibration of low-cost particle matter sensor for size-resolved particle count and PM2.5 measurements.
    Huang CH; He J; Austin E; Seto E; Novosselov I
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(11):e0259745. PubMed ID: 34762676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of Two Low-Cost Optical Particle Counters for the Measurement of Ambient Aerosol Scattering Coefficient and Ångström Exponent.
    Markowicz KM; Chiliński MT
    Sensors (Basel); 2020 May; 20(9):. PubMed ID: 32375350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Developing a Relative Humidity Correction for Low-Cost Sensors Measuring Ambient Particulate Matter.
    Di Antonio A; Popoola OAM; Ouyang B; Saffell J; Jones RL
    Sensors (Basel); 2018 Aug; 18(9):. PubMed ID: 30149560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Laboratory Comparison of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors to Measure Transient Events of Pollution-Part B-Particle Number Concentrations.
    Bulot FMJ; Russell HS; Rezaei M; Johnson MS; Ossont SJ; Morris AKR; Basford PJ; Easton NHC; Mitchell HL; Foster GL; Loxham M; Cox SJ
    Sensors (Basel); 2023 Sep; 23(17):. PubMed ID: 37688113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Laboratory Evaluation of Low-Cost Optical Particle Counters for Environmental and Occupational Exposures.
    Sousan S; Regmi S; Park YM
    Sensors (Basel); 2021 Jun; 21(12):. PubMed ID: 34204182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Performance evaluation of ozone and particulate matter sensors.
    DeWitt HL; Crow WL; Flowers B
    J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2020 Mar; 70(3):292-306. PubMed ID: 31961265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Particulate Matter Measurement Indoors: A Review of Metrics, Sensors, Needs, and Applications.
    Lowther SD; Jones KC; Wang X; Whyatt JD; Wild O; Booker D
    Environ Sci Technol; 2019 Oct; 53(20):11644-11656. PubMed ID: 31512864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Workplace aerosol mass concentration measurement using optical particle counters.
    Görner P; Simon X; Bémer D; Lidén G
    J Environ Monit; 2012 Feb; 14(2):420-8. PubMed ID: 22009365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. How to Get the Best from Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors: Guidelines and Practical Recommendations.
    Brattich E; Bracci A; Zappi A; Morozzi P; Di Sabatino S; Porcù F; Di Nicola F; Tositti L
    Sensors (Basel); 2020 May; 20(11):. PubMed ID: 32485914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Laboratory Comparison of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors to Measure Transient Events of Pollution.
    Bulot FMJ; Russell HS; Rezaei M; Johnson MS; Ossont SJJ; Morris AKR; Basford PJ; Easton NHC; Foster GL; Loxham M; Cox SJ
    Sensors (Basel); 2020 Apr; 20(8):. PubMed ID: 32326452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Statistics of a Sharp GP2Y Low-Cost Aerosol PM Sensor Output Signals.
    Bučar K; Malet J; Stabile L; Pražnikar J; Seeger S; Žitnik M
    Sensors (Basel); 2020 Nov; 20(23):. PubMed ID: 33255163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Personal Exposure Estimates via Portable and Wireless Sensing and Reporting of Particulate Pollution.
    Agrawaal H; Jones C; Thompson JE
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 Jan; 17(3):. PubMed ID: 32013139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessment and statistical modeling of the relationship between remotely sensed aerosol optical depth and PM2.5 in the eastern United States.
    Paciorek CJ; Liu Y;
    Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2012 May; (167):5-83; discussion 85-91. PubMed ID: 22838153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing the Utility of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors over a 12-Week Period in the Cuyama Valley of California.
    Mukherjee A; Stanton LG; Graham AR; Roberts PT
    Sensors (Basel); 2017 Aug; 17(8):. PubMed ID: 28783065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Sources of error and variability in particulate matter sensor network measurements.
    Zuidema C; Stebounova LV; Sousan S; Thomas G; Koehler K; Peters TM
    J Occup Environ Hyg; 2019 Aug; 16(8):564-574. PubMed ID: 31251121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fundamentals of low-cost aerosol sensor design and operation.
    Ouimette J; Arnott WP; Laven P; Whitwell R; Radhakrishnan N; Dhaniyala S; Sandink M; Tryner J; Volckens J
    Aerosol Sci Technol; 2024; 58(1):1-15. PubMed ID: 38993374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Development and application of an aerosol screening model for size-resolved urban aerosols.
    Stanier CO; Lee SR;
    Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2014 Jun; (179):3-79. PubMed ID: 25145039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessment of indoor fine aerosol contributions from environmental tobacco smoke and cooking with a portable nephelometer.
    Brauer M; Hirtle R; Lang B; Ott W
    J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol; 2000; 10(2):136-44. PubMed ID: 10791595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Response Characterization of an Inexpensive Aerosol Sensor.
    Kuula J; Mäkelä T; Hillamo R; Timonen H
    Sensors (Basel); 2017 Dec; 17(12):. PubMed ID: 29244715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.