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 *

297 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15609584)

  • 41. Acceptable range of speech level in noisy sound fields for young adults and elderly persons.
    Sato H; Morimoto M; Ota R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1411-9. PubMed ID: 21895082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Normative data for diagnosing auditory processing disorder in Norwegian children aged 7-12 years.
    Mattsson TS; Follestad T; Andersson S; Lind O; Øygarden J; Nordgård S
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jan; 57(1):10-20. PubMed ID: 28835140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Speech perception in noise for children with auditory neuropathy/dys-synchrony type hearing loss.
    Rance G; Barker E; Mok M; Dowell R; Rincon A; Garratt R
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):351-60. PubMed ID: 17485984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. 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]  

  • 46. 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]  

  • 47. Speech recognition in noise with active and passive hearing protectors: a comparative study.
    Bockstael A; De Coensel B; Botteldooren D; D'Haenens W; Keppler H; Maes L; Philips B; Swinnen F; Bart V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3702-15. PubMed ID: 21682395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. [A simple audiometry test of speech intelligibility in background noise].
    Garin P; Galle C
    Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord); 2002; 123(4):219-24. PubMed ID: 12723485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. The effects of masking on the activation of auditory-associated cortex during speech listening in white noise.
    Hwang JH; Wu CW; Chen JH; Liu TC
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2006 Sep; 126(9):916-20. PubMed ID: 16864487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. A Swedish version of the Hearing In Noise Test (HINT) for measurement of speech recognition.
    Hällgren M; Larsby B; Arlinger S
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Apr; 45(4):227-37. PubMed ID: 16684704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Effects of white noise on Callsign Acquisition Test and Modified Rhyme Test scores.
    Blue-Terry M; Letowski T
    Ergonomics; 2011 Feb; 54(2):139-45. PubMed ID: 21294011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Callsign Acquisition Test (CAT): speech intelligibility in noise.
    Rao MD; Letowski T
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):120-8. PubMed ID: 16518140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Hearing in nonprofessional pop/rock musicians.
    Schmuziger N; Patscheke J; Probst R
    Ear Hear; 2006 Aug; 27(4):321-30. PubMed ID: 16825883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Odds of demonstrating auditory processing abnormality in the average older adult: the Blue Mountains Hearing Study.
    Golding M; Taylor A; Cupples L; Mitchell P
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):129-38. PubMed ID: 16518141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. 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]  

  • 56. Central auditory processing assessment: a French-speaking battery.
    Demanez L; Dony-Closon B; Lhonneux-Ledoux E; Demanez JP
    Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg; 2003; 57(4):275-90. PubMed ID: 14714945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Biological significance of the zoning of the masking effect of noise, related to the adaptive capacities of the auditory analyzer for speech communication.
    Tzaneva L
    Cent Eur J Public Health; 1998 Nov; 6(4):291-2. PubMed ID: 9919380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Acceptable range of speech level for both young and aged listeners in reverberant and quiet sound fields.
    Sato H; Sato H; Morimoto M; Ota R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1616. PubMed ID: 17927421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. A model for multitalker speech perception.
    Srinivasan S; Wang D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Nov; 124(5):3213-24. PubMed ID: 19045805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.