175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10418346)
1. Ambient noise levels in mobile audiometric testing facilities: compliance with industry standards.
Lankford JE; Perrone DC; Thunder TD
AAOHN J; 1999 Apr; 47(4):163-7. PubMed ID: 10418346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Ambient noise levels in industrial audiometric test rooms.
Frank T; Williams DL
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1994 May; 55(5):433-7. PubMed ID: 8209846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The contribution of focus groups in the evaluation of hearing conservation program (HCP) effectiveness.
Prince MM; Colligan MJ; Stephenson CM; Bischoff BJ
J Safety Res; 2004; 35(1):91-106. PubMed ID: 14992850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. ANSI update: maximum permissible ambient noise levels for audiometric test rooms.
Frank T
Am J Audiol; 2000 Jun; 9(1):3-8. PubMed ID: 10943020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Ambient noise levels in audiometric test rooms used for clinical audiometry.
Frank T; Williams DL
Ear Hear; 1993 Dec; 14(6):414-22. PubMed ID: 8307246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Engineering measures can muffle hazards heard in noisy work areas.
Rekus JF
Occup Health Saf; 1993 Sep; 62(9):82-9. PubMed ID: 8414376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of industrial hearing conservation programs: a review and analysis.
Melnick W
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1984 Jul; 45(7):459-67. PubMed ID: 6464993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Evaluation of and trends in hearing surveillance programs in industry].
Malchaire J
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg; 1988; 42(4):529-37. PubMed ID: 3218500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Noise-induced hearing loss.
McReynolds MC
Air Med J; 2005; 24(2):73-8. PubMed ID: 15741953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of daily noise exposures in one workplace based on noise criteria recommended by ACGIH and OSHA.
Petrick ME; Royster LH; Royster JD; Reist P
Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1996 Oct; 57(10):924-8. PubMed ID: 8865602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Ambient Noise Monitoring during Pure-Tone Audiometry.
Margolis RH; Saly GL; Wilson RH
J Am Acad Audiol; 2022 Jan; 33(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 35817024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Methodological issues when comparing hearing thresholds of a group with population standards: the case of the ferry engineers.
Dobie RA
Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):526-37. PubMed ID: 16957502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of background noise on earphone thresholds.
Frank T; Williams DL
J Am Acad Audiol; 1993 May; 4(3):201-12. PubMed ID: 8318711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Mobile soundproof booth for audiometric industrial testing].
Grzesik J; Kowalska H; Pawlas K
Med Pr; 1977; 28(1):57-60. PubMed ID: 865269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessment of noise exposure in a hospital kitchen.
Achutan C
Noise Health; 2009; 11(44):145-50. PubMed ID: 19602767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Does your audiometric monitoring program measure up?
Gasaway DC
Occup Health Saf; 1995 Apr; 64(4):58-61. PubMed ID: 7724164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Continuing exposure to hexavalent chromium, a known lung carcinogen: an analysis of OSHA compliance inspections, 1990-2000.
Lurie P; Wolfe SM
Am J Ind Med; 2002 Nov; 42(5):378-83. PubMed ID: 12382250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Limitations of occupational air contaminant standards, as exemplified by the neurotoxin N-hexane.
Lanska DJ
J Public Health Policy; 1999; 20(4):441-58. PubMed ID: 10643170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The Hearing Conservation Amendment (Part I).
Berger EH
Occup Health Nurs; 1983 Nov; 31(11):15-7. PubMed ID: 6557429
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Noise attenuation characteristics of the MX-41/AR and the Telephonics circumaural audiometric headsets.
Bienvenue GR; Michael PL
J Am Audiol Soc; 1978; 4(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 721665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
