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 *

76 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10603546)

  • 1. Most Comfortable Listening Level and Speech Attenuation by Hearing Protectors.
    Letowski T; Magistro DM; Ritter AC
    Int J Occup Saf Ergon; 1995 Jan; 1(2):153-159. PubMed ID: 10603546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Most comfortable loudness shift as a measure of speech attenuation by hearing protectors.
    Letowski T; Burstein N; Clark J; Romanowski L; Sevec A
    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1995 Apr; 56(4):356-61. PubMed ID: 7726101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Detection of warble tones in wideband noise with and without hearing protection devices.
    Letowski T; McGee L
    Ann Occup Hyg; 1993 Dec; 37(6):607-14. PubMed ID: 8304681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. To measure the impact of hearing protectors on the perception of speech in noise.
    Hiselius P; Edvall N; Reimers D
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Feb; 54 Suppl 1():S3-8. PubMed ID: 25549165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Effect of Hearing-Protection Devices on Auditory Situational Awareness and Listening Effort.
    Smalt CJ; Calamia PT; Dumas AP; Perricone JP; Patel T; Bobrow J; Collins PP; Markey ML; Quatieri TF
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(1):82-94. PubMed ID: 31045653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Speech recognition in noise under hearing protection: A computational study of the combined effects of hearing loss and hearing protector attenuation.
    Giguère C; Berger EH
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 1():S30-40. PubMed ID: 26840922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of hearing protection devices on speech intelligibility of Persian employees.
    Karami M; Aliabadi M; Golmohammadi R; Hamidi Nahrani M
    BMC Res Notes; 2020 Nov; 13(1):529. PubMed ID: 33176877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of muff-type hearing protectors as used in a working environment.
    Giardino DA; Durkt G
    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1996 Mar; 57(3):264-71. PubMed ID: 8776197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effectiveness of hearing protection among construction workers.
    Neitzel R; Seixas N
    J Occup Environ Hyg; 2005 Apr; 2(4):227-38. PubMed ID: 15788384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Gender differences in use of hearing protection devices among farm operators.
    McCullagh MC; Banerjee T; Yang JJ; Bernick J; Duffy S; Redman R
    Noise Health; 2016; 18(85):368-375. PubMed ID: 27991469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Speech intelligibility and passive, level-dependent earplugs.
    Norin JA; Emanuel DC; Letowski TR
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):642-9. PubMed ID: 21407078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Field attenuation characteristics of hearing protectors and differences in estimating their attenuation with different methods.
    Gong W; Xu Y; Liu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2022 Jun; 151(6):3979. PubMed ID: 35778180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Signal detection and speech perception with level-dependent hearing protectors.
    Abel SM; Krever EM; Giguere C; Alberti PW
    J Otolaryngol; 1991 Feb; 20(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 2030537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Variations in voice level and fundamental frequency with changing background noise level and talker-to-listener distance while wearing hearing protectors: A pilot study.
    Bouserhal RE; Macdonald EN; Falk TH; Voix J
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 1():S13-20. PubMed ID: 26765993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Experimental assessment of the effect of wearing hearing protectors on the audibility of railway warning signals for normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
    Arz JP; Grimault N; El Sawaf O
    Int J Occup Saf Ergon; 2022 Dec; 28(4):2385-2395. PubMed ID: 34633273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Augmented warning sound detection for hearing protectors.
    Bernstein ER; Brammer AJ; Yu G
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL29-34. PubMed ID: 24437853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Modulation-based digital noise reduction for application to hearing protectors to reduce noise and maintain intelligibility.
    Chung K; Tufts J; Nelson L
    Hum Factors; 2009 Feb; 51(1):78-89. PubMed ID: 19634311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech intelligibility in noise with ear protectors.
    Abel SM; Alberti PW; Riko K
    J Otolaryngol; 1980 Jun; 9(3):256-65. PubMed ID: 7001041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of Active and Passive Hearing Protection Devices on Sound Source Localization, Speech Recognition, and Tone Detection.
    Brown AD; Beemer BT; Greene NT; Argo T; Meegan GD; Tollin DJ
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(8):e0136568. PubMed ID: 26313145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effects of protector-noise interaction on the accuracy of the NRR estimate of hearing protector attenuation.
    Cluff GL
    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1986 Apr; 47(4):195-8. PubMed ID: 3706147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.