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 *

79 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7592152)

  • 21. Stimulation and control as components of stereotyped body rocking.
    Buyer LS; Berkson G; Winnega MA; Morton L
    Am J Ment Defic; 1987 Mar; 91(5):543-7. PubMed ID: 3565498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A systematic evaluation of preferences identified through person-centered planning for people with profound multiple disabilities.
    Reid DH; Everson JM; Green CW
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1999; 32(4):467-77. PubMed ID: 10641301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Using brief assessments to evaluate aberrant behavior maintained by attention.
    O'Reilly MF; Lancioni GE; King L; Lally G; Dhomhnaill ON
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(1):109-12. PubMed ID: 10738961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Examination of ambiguous stimulus preferences with duration-based measures.
    DeLeon IG; Iwata BA; Conners J; Wallace MD
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1999; 32(1):111-4. PubMed ID: 10201108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effects of deprivation on engagement in preferred activities by persons with developmental disabilities.
    Klatt KP; Sherman JA; Sheldon JB
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(4):495-506. PubMed ID: 11214025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Empirically based methods to assess the preferences of individuals with severe disabilities.
    Lohrmann-O'Rourke S; Browder DM
    Am J Ment Retard; 1998 Sep; 103(2):146-61. PubMed ID: 9779282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Gestational exposure to methylmercury retards choice in transition in aging rats.
    Newland MC; Reile PA; Langston JL
    Neurotoxicol Teratol; 2004; 26(2):179-94. PubMed ID: 15019952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The effects of meal schedule and quantity on problematic behavior.
    Wacker DP; Harding J; Cooper LJ; Derby KM; Peck S; Asmus J; Berg WK; Brown KA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 8881346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A comparison of reinforcer assessment methods: the utility of verbal and pictorial choice procedures.
    Northup J; George T; Jones K; Broussard C; Vollmer TR
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(2):201-12. PubMed ID: 8682736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context.
    Carr JE; Nicolson AC; Higbee TS
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(3):353-7. PubMed ID: 11051581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Longitudinal analysis of leisure-item preferences.
    Zhou L; Iwata BA; Goff GA; Shore BA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(2):179-84. PubMed ID: 11421310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Combining noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement schedules as treatment for aberrant behavior.
    Marcus BA; Vollmer TR
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(1):43-51. PubMed ID: 8881343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Efficacy of and preference for reinforcement and response cost in token economies.
    Jowett Hirst ES; Dozier CL; Payne SW
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2016 Jun; 49(2):329-45. PubMed ID: 26916640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Preferred curricular activities and reduced problem behaviors in students with intellectual disabilities.
    Foster-Johnson L; Ferro J; Dunlap G
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1994; 27(3):493-504. PubMed ID: 7928791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Response allocation to concurrent fixed-ratio reinforcement schedules with work requirements by adults with mental retardation and typical preschool children.
    Cuvo AJ; Lerch LJ; Leurquin DA; Gaffaney TJ; Poppen RL
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1998; 31(1):43-63. PubMed ID: 9532750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Duration-based measures of preference for vocational tasks.
    Worsdell AS; Iwata BA; Wallace MD
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2002; 35(3):287-90. PubMed ID: 12365742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Embedded evaluation of preferences sampled from person-centered plans for people with profound multiple disabilities.
    Green CW; Middleton SG; Reid DH
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(4):639-42. PubMed ID: 11214041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Evaluating the reinforcing effects of choice in comparison to reinforcement rate.
    Thompson RH; Fisher WW; Contrucci SA
    Res Dev Disabil; 1998; 19(2):181-7. PubMed ID: 9547528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities.
    Fisher W; Piazza CC; Bowman LG; Hagopian LP; Owens JC; Slevin I
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1992; 25(2):491-8. PubMed ID: 1634435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Evaluating the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement preference assessment.
    Hagopian LP; Rush KS; Lewin AB; Long ES
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(4):475-85. PubMed ID: 11800186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.