BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15748113)

  • 1. Perceptual evaluation of hypernasality compared to HONC measures: the role of experience.
    Laczi E; Sussman JE; Stathopoulos ET; Huber J
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2005 Mar; 42(2):202-11. PubMed ID: 15748113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling of hypernasality.
    Whitehill TL; Lee AS; Chun JC
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Feb; 45(1):80-8. PubMed ID: 14748640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison between perceptual assessments of nasality and nasalance scores.
    Brunnegård K; Lohmander A; van Doorn J
    Int J Lang Commun Disord; 2012; 47(5):556-66. PubMed ID: 22938066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Perceptual evaluation of speech and velopharyngeal function in children with and without cleft palate and the relationship to nasal airflow patterns.
    Dotevall H; Lohmander-Agerskov A; Ejnell H; Bake B
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2002 Jul; 39(4):409-24. PubMed ID: 12071789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. HONC measures in 4- to 6-year-old children. Horii Oral Nasal Coupling Index.
    Mra Z; Sussman JE; Fenwick J
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 1998 Sep; 35(5):408-14. PubMed ID: 9761559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The nasality severity index: an objective measure of hypernasality based on a multiparameter approach. A pilot study.
    Van Lierde KM; Wuyts FL; Bonte K; Van Cauwenberge P
    Folia Phoniatr Logop; 2007; 59(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 17172784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of oral-nasal balance patterns in speakers who are categorized as "almost but not quite" and "sometimes but not always".
    Jones DL; Morris HL; Van Demark DR
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2004 Sep; 41(5):526-34. PubMed ID: 15352856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of vowel type on reliability of nasality ratings.
    Watterson T; Lewis K; Allord M; Sulprizio S; O'Neill P
    J Commun Disord; 2007; 40(6):503-12. PubMed ID: 17391692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The influence of listener training on the perceptual assessment of hypernasality.
    Oliveira AC; Scarmagnani RH; Fukushiro AP; Yamashita RP
    Codas; 2016 Apr; 28(2):141-8. PubMed ID: 27191877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Untrained listeners' ratings of speech disorders in a group with cleft palate: a comparison with speech and language pathologists' ratings.
    Brunnegård K; Lohmander A; van Doorn J
    Int J Lang Commun Disord; 2009; 44(5):656-74. PubMed ID: 18821109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Factors affecting speech in patients with isolated cleft palate. A methodic, clinical and instrumental study.
    Haapanen ML
    Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg Suppl; 1992; 26():1-61. PubMed ID: 1486205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of consensus training on the reliability of auditory perceptual ratings of voice quality.
    Iwarsson J; Reinholt Petersen N
    J Voice; 2012 May; 26(3):304-12. PubMed ID: 21840170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The relationship between the Nasality Severity Index 2.0 and perceptual judgments of hypernasality.
    Bettens K; De Bodt M; Maryn Y; Luyten A; Wuyts FL; Van Lierde KM
    J Commun Disord; 2016; 62():67-81. PubMed ID: 27310727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The long-term speech outcome in Flemish young adults after two different types of palatoplasty.
    Van Lierde KM; Monstrey S; Bonte K; Van Cauwenberge P; Vinck B
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2004 Jul; 68(7):865-75. PubMed ID: 15183576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of speech sample on perceptual rating of hypernasality.
    Medeiros MN; Fukushiro AP; Yamashita RP
    Codas; 2016 Jul; 0():0. PubMed ID: 27409419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The influence of listener experience and academic training on ratings of nasality.
    Lewis KE; Watterson TL; Houghton SM
    J Commun Disord; 2003; 36(1):49-58. PubMed ID: 12493637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of Rater's reliability on perceptual evaluation of different types of voice sample.
    Law T; Kim JH; Lee KY; Tang EC; Lam JH; van Hasselt AC; Tong MC
    J Voice; 2012 Sep; 26(5):666.e13-21. PubMed ID: 22243971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of speech disorders in children with cleft lip and palate.
    Paal S; Reulbach U; Strobel-Schwarthoff K; Nkenke E; Schuster M
    J Orofac Orthop; 2005 Jul; 66(4):270-8. PubMed ID: 16044225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of hypernasality in vowels using voice low tone to high tone ratio.
    Lee GS; Wang CP; Fu S
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2009 Jan; 46(1):47-52. PubMed ID: 19115797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. NORAM--an instrument used in the assessment of hypernasality: a clinical investigation.
    Karling J; Larson O; Leanderson R; Galyas K; de Serpa-Leitâo A
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 1993 Mar; 30(2):135-40. PubMed ID: 8452832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.