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 *

106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1421462)

  • 1. High-frequency thresholds: sound suite versus hospital room.
    Valente M; Potts LG; Valente M; French-St George M; Goebel J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1992 Jul; 3(4):287-94. PubMed ID: 1421462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. High-frequency pure-tone audiometry in children: a test-retest reliability study relative to ototoxic criteria.
    Beahan N; Kei J; Driscoll C; Charles B; Khan A
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(1):104-11. PubMed ID: 21760512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. High-frequency thresholds: circumaural earphone versus insert earphone.
    Valente M; Valente M; Goebel J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1992 Nov; 3(6):410-8. PubMed ID: 1486204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Test-retest reliability of high-frequency thresholds at bedside with sensorineural hearing-impaired listeners.
    Sinks BC; Goebel JA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1994 Nov; 5(6):399-401. PubMed ID: 7858301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The relationship between high-frequency pure-tone hearing loss, hearing in noise test (HINT) thresholds, and the articulation index.
    Vermiglio AJ; Soli SD; Freed DJ; Fisher LM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(10):779-88. PubMed ID: 23169195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Auditory Processing Testing: In the Booth versus Outside the Booth.
    Lucker JR
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Sep; 28(8):679-684. PubMed ID: 28906239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Automated Audiometry in Quiet and Simulated Exam Room Noise for Listeners with Normal Hearing and Impaired Hearing.
    Bean BN; Roberts RA; Picou EM; Angley GP; Edwards AJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2022 Jan; 33(1):6-13. PubMed ID: 34034339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Fixed-Level Frequency Threshold Testing for Ototoxicity Monitoring.
    Rieke CC; Clavier OH; Allen LV; Anderson AP; Brooks CA; Fellows AM; Brungart DS; Buckey JC
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(6):e369-e375. PubMed ID: 28362673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. High-frequency (8 to 16 kHz) reference thresholds and intrasubject threshold variability relative to ototoxicity criteria using a Sennheiser HDA 200 earphone.
    Frank T
    Ear Hear; 2001 Apr; 22(2):161-8. PubMed ID: 11324845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of conventional and in-situ audiometry on participants with varying levels of sensorineural hearing loss.
    Kiessling J; Leifholz M; Unkel S; Pons-Kühnemann J; Jespersen CT; Pedersen JN
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Jan; 26(1):68-79. PubMed ID: 25597462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diagnostic pure-tone audiometry in schools: mobile testing without a sound-treated environment.
    Swanepoel de W; Maclennan-Smith F; Hall JW
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013; 24(10):992-1000. PubMed ID: 24384084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Identification of conductive hearing loss using air conduction tests alone: reliability and validity of an automatic test battery.
    Convery E; Keidser G; Seeto M; Freeston K; Zhou D; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(1):e1-8. PubMed ID: 24080948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Predicting the degree of hearing loss using click auditory brainstem response in babies referred from newborn hearing screening.
    Baldwin M; Watkin P
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):361-9. PubMed ID: 23340456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using a combination of click- and tone burst-evoked auditory brain stem response measurements to estimate pure-tone thresholds.
    Gorga MP; Johnson TA; Kaminski JR; Beauchaine KL; Garner CA; Neely ST
    Ear Hear; 2006 Feb; 27(1):60-74. PubMed ID: 16446565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Telephone screening tests for functionally impaired hearing: current use in seven countries and development of a US version.
    Watson CS; Kidd GR; Miller JD; Smits C; Humes LE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(10):757-67. PubMed ID: 23169193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Active noise reduction audiometry: a prospective analysis of a new approach to noise management in audiometric testing.
    Bromwich MA; Parsa V; Lanthier N; Yoo J; Parnes LS
    Laryngoscope; 2008 Jan; 118(1):104-9. PubMed ID: 18043495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Efficient hearing screening in noise-exposed listeners using the digit triplet test.
    Jansen S; Luts H; Dejonckere P; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(6):773-8. PubMed ID: 23782715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Equivalence and test-retest reproducibility of conventional and extended-high-frequency audiometric thresholds obtained using pure-tone and narrow-band-noise stimuli.
    John AB; Kreisman BM
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Sep; 56(9):635-642. PubMed ID: 28388868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Acoustic echoplanar scanner noise and pure tone hearing thresholds: the effects of sequence repetition times and acoustic noise rates.
    Ulmer JL; Biswal BB; Mark LP; Mathews VP; Prost RW; Millen SJ; Garman JN; Horzewski D
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1998; 22(3):480-6. PubMed ID: 9606392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Smartphone threshold audiometry in underserved primary health-care contexts.
    Sandström J; Swanepoel de W; Carel Myburgh H; Laurent C
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55(4):232-8. PubMed ID: 26795898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.