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)

  • 41. Perceptual consequences of different signal changes due to binaural noise reduction: do hearing loss and working memory capacity play a role?
    Neher T; Grimm G; Hohmann V
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(5):e213-27. PubMed ID: 25010636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. School-Age Hearing Screening Based on Speech-in-Noise Perception Using the Digit Triplet Test.
    Denys S; Hofmann M; Luts H; Guérin C; Keymeulen A; Van Hoeck K; van Wieringen A; Hoppenbrouwers K; Wouters J
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(6):1104-1115. PubMed ID: 29557793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. An Italian matrix sentence test for the evaluation of speech intelligibility in noise.
    Puglisi GE; Warzybok A; Hochmuth S; Visentin C; Astolfi A; Prodi N; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():44-50. PubMed ID: 26371592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Digit speech recognition threshold (SRT) in children with normal hearing ages 5-8 years.
    Ramkissoon I; Estis JM; Gaal Flagge A
    Am J Audiol; 2014 Jun; 23(2):182-9. PubMed ID: 24686505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Development and validation of the Speech Reception in Noise (SPRINT) Test.
    Brungart DS; Walden B; Cord M; Phatak S; Theodoroff SM; Griest S; Grant KW
    Hear Res; 2017 Jun; 349():90-97. PubMed ID: 28111321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Relationship between masking release in fluctuating maskers and speech reception thresholds in stationary noise.
    Christiansen C; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1655-66. PubMed ID: 22978894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The NTID speech recognition test: NSRT(®).
    Bochner JH; Garrison WM; Doherty KA
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jul; 54(7):490-8. PubMed ID: 25634775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners.
    George EL; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Goverts ST; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Apr; 121(4):2362-75. PubMed ID: 17471748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. White noise use among children undergoing sound field audiometry: A preliminary study.
    Ma AC; Rosi-Schumacher M; Corbin AF; Geisen H; Carr MM
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2024 Jun; 181():111982. PubMed ID: 38776720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise.
    Smits C; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):3004-15. PubMed ID: 23654404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test.
    Warzybok A; Zokoll M; Wardenga N; Ozimek E; Boboshko M; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():35-43. PubMed ID: 25843088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Speech recognition threshold in slightly and fully modulated noise for hearing-impaired subjects.
    Hagerman B
    Int J Audiol; 2002 Sep; 41(6):321-9. PubMed ID: 12353604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. [Current audiological tests in the diagnosis of sensorineural hearing loss caused by noise].
    Diskalenko VV
    Vestn Otorinolaringol; 1990; (6):12-4. PubMed ID: 2075669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Validity of self-rated hearing compared with audiometric measurement among construction workers.
    Hong O; Ronis DL; Antonakos CL
    Nurs Res; 2011; 60(5):326-32. PubMed ID: 21873915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Noise-induced hearing loss and the comprehension of speech in noise.
    Quist-Hanssen S; Thorud E; Aasand G
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1979; 360():90-5. PubMed ID: 287364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Audiological management of noise induced hearing loss.
    Arslan E; Orzan E
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1998; 48():131-45. PubMed ID: 9505306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Improved Sensitivity of Digits-in-Noise Test to High-Frequency Hearing Loss.
    Motlagh Zadeh L; Silbert NH; Swanepoel W; Moore DR
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(3):565-573. PubMed ID: 33928924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests.
    Hochmuth S; Kollmeier B; Brand T; Jürgens T
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():62-70. PubMed ID: 26097982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. How much does language proficiency by non-native listeners influence speech audiometric tests in noise?
    Warzybok A; Brand T; Wagener KC; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():88-99. PubMed ID: 26344170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Audiologic characteristics in a sample of recently-separated military Veterans: The Noise Outcomes in Servicemembers Epidemiology Study (NOISE Study).
    Gordon JS; Griest SE; Thielman EJ; Carlson KF; Helt WJ; Lewis MS; Blankenship C; Austin D; Theodoroff SM; Henry JA
    Hear Res; 2017 Jun; 349():21-30. PubMed ID: 27913314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.