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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8227867)

  • 1. Comparative performance of five commercial prick skin test devices.
    Nelson HS; Rosloniec DM; McCall LI; Iklé D
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1993 Nov; 92(5):750-6. PubMed ID: 8227867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of devices for skin prick testing.
    Nelson HS; Lahr J; Buchmeier A; McCormick D
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1998 Feb; 101(2 Pt 1):153-6. PubMed ID: 9500746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of two disposable plastic skin test devices with the bifurcated needle for epicutaneous allergy testing.
    Corder WT; Hogan MB; Wilson NW
    Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol; 1996 Sep; 77(3):222-6. PubMed ID: 8814048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Comparative study of 3 types of lancets for performing prick tests].
    Montalvo A; Martín S; Mesa A; Cortés C; Rodríguez M; Laso MT
    Allergol Immunopathol (Madr); 1996; 24(2):58-64. PubMed ID: 8992889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reproducibility of skin prick test results in epidemiologic studies: a comparison of two devices.
    Illi S; Garcia-Marcos L; Hernando V; Guillen JJ; Liese A; von Mutius E
    Allergy; 1998 Apr; 53(4):353-8. PubMed ID: 9574876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Performance and Pain Tolerability of Current Diagnostic Allergy Skin Prick Test Devices.
    Tversky JR; Chelladurai Y; McGready J; Hamilton RG
    J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract; 2015; 3(6):888-93. PubMed ID: 26553615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of six epicutaneous devices in the performance of immediate hypersensitivity skin testing.
    Adinoff AD; Rosloniec DM; McCall LL; Nelson HS
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1989 Aug; 84(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 2760359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of distance between sites and region of the body on results of skin prick tests.
    Nelson HS; Knoetzer J; Bucher B
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1996 Feb; 97(2):596-601. PubMed ID: 8621844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of the Multi-Test II and ComforTen allergy skin test devices.
    Dykewicz MS; Dooms KT; Chassaing DL
    Allergy Asthma Proc; 2011; 32(3):198-202. PubMed ID: 21703099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [The comparison of reactions in skin prick test performed with the standardized lancet and the injection needle].
    Semik-Orzech A; Barczyk A; Pierzchała W
    Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2008 Jun; 24(144):495-501. PubMed ID: 18702329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of a new lancet and a hypodermic needle for skin prick testing.
    Dirksen A; Mosbech H; Søborg M; Biering I
    Allergy; 1983 Jul; 38(5):359-62. PubMed ID: 6614408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of three methods of using the DermaPIK with the standard prick method for epicutaneous skin testing.
    Corder WT; Wilson NW
    Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol; 1995 Nov; 75(5):434-8. PubMed ID: 7583866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Pain perception and performance of three devices for single-site allergen skin testing.
    Nelson HS; Lopez P; Curran-Everett D
    Allergy Asthma Proc; 2014; 35(1):63-5. PubMed ID: 24433598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of the Multi-Test device for immediate hypersensitivity skin testing.
    Berkowitz RB; Tinkelman DG; Lutz C; Crummie A; Smith K
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1992 Dec; 90(6 Pt 1):979-85. PubMed ID: 1460201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Comparison of two lancets in the skin prick test].
    Castro Almarales RL; Primo Valdés SI; González León M; Navarro Viltre BI; Alvarez Castañeda M; Irarragorri Toledo C; Ronquillo Díaz M; García Gómez I; Labrada Rosado A
    Rev Alerg Mex; 2005; 52(5):188-93. PubMed ID: 16579181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Histamine control affects the weal produced by the adjacent diluent control in skin prick tests.
    Terho EO; Husman K; Kivekäs J; Riihimäki H
    Allergy; 1989 Jan; 44(1):30-2. PubMed ID: 2719175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Skin prick test responses to codeine, histamine, and ragweed utilizing the Multitest device.
    Lin RY; Erlich ER; Don PC
    Ann Allergy; 1990 Sep; 65(3):222-6. PubMed ID: 2403228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of the Multi-Test II and Skintestor Omni allergy skin test devices.
    Dykewicz MS; Lemmon JK; Keaney DL
    Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol; 2007 Jun; 98(6):559-62. PubMed ID: 17601269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of three methods for using the Duotip-Test device for skin testing.
    Sangsupawanich P; Chamnanphol S; Koonrungsrisomboon D
    Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol; 2000 Sep; 18(3):153-6. PubMed ID: 11270470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of the Quintest to the lancet in allergic skin testing.
    Carrozzi FM; Byth K; Katelaris CH
    Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol; 1998 Dec; 16(4):149-54. PubMed ID: 10219895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.