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 *

180 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10052834)

  • 1. Speech audiometry in noise-exposed workers: the SRT-PTA relationship revisited.
    Picard M; Banville R; Barbarosie T; Manolache M
    Audiology; 1999; 38(1):30-43. PubMed ID: 10052834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Göttingen sentence in noise for different audiogram classes].
    Thiele C; Sukowksi H; Lenarz T; Lesinski-Schiedat A
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2012 Dec; 91(12):782-8. PubMed ID: 22234848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment.
    Wardenga N; Batsoulis C; Wagener KC; Brand T; Lenarz T; Maier H
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():71-9. PubMed ID: 26555195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 3: test sensitivity for uncontrolled parameters in domestic usage.
    Leensen MC; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Oct; 52(10):658-69. PubMed ID: 23819619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 1: test evaluation for noise-induced hearing loss identification.
    Leensen MC; de Laat JA; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Nov; 50(11):823-34. PubMed ID: 21988504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Speech-in-speech listening on the LiSN-S test by older adults with good audiograms depends on cognition and hearing acuity at high frequencies.
    Besser J; Festen JM; Goverts ST; Kramer SE; Pichora-Fuller MK
    Ear Hear; 2015 Jan; 36(1):24-41. PubMed ID: 25207850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Exploring the sensitivity of speech-in-noise tests for noise-induced hearing loss.
    Jansen S; Luts H; Dejonckere P; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Mar; 53(3):199-205. PubMed ID: 24237040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The digits-in-noise test: assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise.
    Smits C; Theo Goverts S; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1693-706. PubMed ID: 23464039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Intelligibility of Dutch CVC syllables and sentences for listeners with normal hearing and with three types of hearing impairment.
    Bosman AJ; Smoorenburg GF
    Audiology; 1995; 34(5):260-84. PubMed ID: 8837785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Determination of hearing loss and disability assessment from pure tone audiometry and speech audiometry in occupational noise-induced hearing loss].
    Brusis T
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1996 Dec; 75(12):732-8. PubMed ID: 9081278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The applicability of a speech-in-noise screening test in occupational hearing conservation.
    Leensen MC; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Jul; 52(7):455-65. PubMed ID: 23772828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Discrimination of degrees of auditory performance from the digits-in-noise test based on hearing status.
    Armstrong NM; Oosterloo BC; Croll PH; Ikram MA; Goedegebure A
    Int J Audiol; 2020 Dec; 59(12):897-904. PubMed ID: 32673129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Development and validation of an automatic speech-in-noise screening test by telephone.
    Smits C; Kapteyn TS; Houtgast T
    Int J Audiol; 2004 Jan; 43(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 14974624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Learning effect observed for the speech reception threshold in interrupted noise with normal hearing listeners.
    Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2008 Apr; 47(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 18389414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Hearing Loss and Speech Recognition in the Elderly].
    von Gablenz P; Holube I
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2017 Nov; 96(11):759-764. PubMed ID: 29132188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Identification of pseudohypacusis using speech recognition thresholds.
    Schlauch RS; Arnce KD; Olson LM; Sanchez S; Doyle TN
    Ear Hear; 1996 Jun; 17(3):229-36. PubMed ID: 8807265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Clinical study of speech understanding in noise].
    Tremblay C; Picard M; Barbarosie T; Banville R
    Audiology; 1991; 30(4):212-40. PubMed ID: 1755750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Functional outcomes for speech-in-noise intelligibility of NAL-NL2 and DSL v.5 prescriptive fitting rules in hearing aid users.
    Portelli D; Loteta S; Ciodaro F; Salvago P; Galletti C; Freni L; Alberti G
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2024 Jun; 281(6):3227-3235. PubMed ID: 38546852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. New measures of masked text recognition in relation to speech-in-noise perception and their associations with age and cognitive abilities.
    Besser J; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Rönnberg J; Festen JM
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2012 Feb; 55(1):194-209. PubMed ID: 22199191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A novel approach for estimating initial sound level for speech reception threshold test.
    Lee H; Park R; Kim S; Cho HH; Won Y
    Technol Health Care; 2024; 32(S1):197-206. PubMed ID: 38759049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.