References
- Van Roey K, Sokny M, Denis L, et al. Field evaluation of picaridin repellants reveals differences in repellant sensitivity between Southeast Asian vectors of malaria and arboviruses. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8:e3326.
- Katz TM, Miller JH, Hebert AA. Insect repellents: historical perspectives and new developments. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;58:865–871.
- Diaz JH. Chemical and plant-based insect repellents: efficacy, safety, and toxicity. Wilderness Environ Med. 2016;27:153–163.
- Lawrence KL, Achee NL, Bernier UR, et al. Field evaluations of topical arthropod repellents in North, Central, and South America. J Med Entomol. 2014;51:980–988.
- Frances SP, Waterston DGE, Beebe NW, et al. Field evaluation of repellent formulations containing DEET and picaridin against mosquitoes in Northern Territory, Australia. J Med Entomol. 2004;41:414–417.
- Consumer Reports. What really works against bug bites Consumer Reports reveals new, safer options to keep mosquitoes and ticks at bay; [cited 2015 Feb 22]. Available from: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2015/05/what-really-works-against-bug-bites/index.htm.
- Antwi FB, Shama LM, Peterson RK. Risk assessments for the insect repellents DEET and picaridin. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2008;51:31–36.
- Wahle BS, Sangha GK, Lake SG, et al. Chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity testing in the Sprague-Dawley rat of a prospective insect repellant (KBR 3023) using the dermal route of exposure. Toxicology. 1999;142:41–56.
- Wahle BS, Sangha GK, Elcock LE, et al. Carcinogenicity testing in the CD-1 mouse of a prospective insect repellent (KBR 3023) using the dermal route of exposure. Toxicology. 1999;142:29–39.
- Astroff AB, Young AD, Holzum B, et al. Conduct and interpretation of a dermal developmental toxicity study with KBR 3023 (a prospective insect repellent) in the Sprague-Dawley rat and Himalayan rabbit. Teratology. 2000;61:222–230.