Cargando…
PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test?
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
| Lenguaje: | English |
| Publicado: |
American Thoracic Society
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6467305/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30640509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201809-1765LE |
| _version_ | 1783411245922123776 |
|---|---|
| author | Amirav, Israel Newhouse, Michael T. |
| author_facet | Amirav, Israel Newhouse, Michael T. |
| author_sort | Amirav, Israel |
| collection | PubMed |
| description | |
| format | Online Article Text |
| id | pubmed-6467305 |
| institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publisher | American Thoracic Society |
| record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
| spelling | pubmed-64673052019-04-30 PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? Amirav, Israel Newhouse, Michael T. Am J Respir Crit Care Med Correspondence American Thoracic Society 2019-04-15 2019-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6467305/ /pubmed/30640509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201809-1765LE Text en Copyright © 2019 by the American Thoracic Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ). For commercial usage and reprints, please contact Diane Gern (dgern@thoracic.org). |
| spellingShingle | Correspondence Amirav, Israel Newhouse, Michael T. PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? |
| title | PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? |
| title_full | PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? |
| title_fullStr | PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? |
| title_full_unstemmed | PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? |
| title_short | PC(20) versus PD(20): Why Change a Scientifically Well-Established and Clinically Relevant Test? |
| title_sort | pc(20) versus pd(20): why change a scientifically well-established and clinically relevant test? |
| topic | Correspondence |
| url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6467305/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30640509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201809-1765LE |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT amiravisrael pc20versuspd20whychangeascientificallywellestablishedandclinicallyrelevanttest AT newhousemichaelt pc20versuspd20whychangeascientificallywellestablishedandclinicallyrelevanttest |