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.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search


118 related items for PubMed ID: 33870398

  • 1. Partitioning between polyurethane foam and the gas phase: data compilation, uncertainty estimation and implications for air sampling.
    Li Y, Wania F.
    Environ Sci Process Impacts; 2021 May 26; 23(5):723-734. PubMed ID: 33870398
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Approaches for estimating PUF-air partitions coefficient for semi-volatile organic compounds: A critical comparison.
    Okeme JO, Webster EM, Parnis JM, Diamond ML.
    Chemosphere; 2017 Feb 26; 168():199-204. PubMed ID: 27783960
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Field estimates of polyurethane foam - air partition coefficients for hexachlorobenzene, alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane and bromoanisoles.
    Bidleman TF, Nygren O, Tysklind M.
    Chemosphere; 2016 Sep 26; 159():126-131. PubMed ID: 27285381
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Passive indoor air sampling for consumer product chemicals: a field evaluation study.
    Dodson RE, Bessonneau V, Udesky JO, Nishioka M, McCauley M, Rudel RA.
    J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol; 2019 Jan 26; 29(1):95-108. PubMed ID: 30237551
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Graphical tools for the planning and interpretation of polyurethane foam based passive air sampling campaigns.
    Li Y, Armitage JM, Wania F.
    Environ Sci Process Impacts; 2022 Mar 23; 24(3):414-425. PubMed ID: 35195629
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Characterizing PUF disk passive air samplers for alkyl-substituted PAHs: Measured and modelled PUF-AIR partition coefficients with COSMO-RS.
    Parnis JM, Eng A, Mackay D, Harner T.
    Chemosphere; 2016 Feb 23; 145():360-4. PubMed ID: 26692513
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Calibration and evaluation of PUF-PAS sampling rates across the Global Atmospheric Passive Sampling (GAPS) network.
    Herkert NJ, Spak SN, Smith A, Schuster JK, Harner T, Martinez A, Hornbuckle KC.
    Environ Sci Process Impacts; 2018 Jan 24; 20(1):210-219. PubMed ID: 29094747
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Exploring QSPR models for predicting PUF-air partition coefficients of organic compounds with linear and nonlinear approaches.
    Zhu T, Gu L, Chen M, Sun F.
    Chemosphere; 2021 Mar 24; 266():128962. PubMed ID: 33218721
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]


    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.