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.
42. Chamber test versus patch test for epicutaneous testing. Pirilä V Contact Dermatitis; 1975; 1(1):48-52. PubMed ID: 1235071 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Assessment of erythema in irritant contact dermatitis. Comparison between visual scoring and laser Doppler flowmetry. Willis CM; Stephens CJ; Wilkinson JD Contact Dermatitis; 1988 Mar; 18(3):138-42. PubMed ID: 2966711 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Water versus petrolatum as vehicle for patch testing methylisothiazolinone + methylchloroisothiazolinone (Kathon CG). de Groot AC Contact Dermatitis; 1990 May; 22(5):300-1. PubMed ID: 2383991 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Patch testing in actinic prurigo. Lane PR; Harms VL; Hogan DJ Contact Dermatitis; 1989 Oct; 21(4):249-54. PubMed ID: 2598651 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Proallergens of formaldehyde applied in patch testing of formaldehyde contact allergy. Hansen J; Albrechtsen S; Hedegård K J Am Acad Dermatol; 1989 Oct; 21(4 Pt 2):838-40. PubMed ID: 2600209 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Variations in the quantities of petrolatum applied in patch testing. Antoine JL; Lachapelle JM Derm Beruf Umwelt; 1988; 36(6):191-4. PubMed ID: 3234271 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. The influence of temperature on the concentration homogeneity of patch test materials. Goh CL; Kwok SF Contact Dermatitis; 1986 Oct; 15(4):231-4. PubMed ID: 3802807 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]