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 *

67 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19894836)

  • 21. Hearing dummies: individualized computer models of hearing impairment.
    Panda MR; Lecluyse W; Tan CM; Jürgens T; Meddis R
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Oct; 53(10):699-709. PubMed ID: 24915528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A maximum-likelihood procedure for estimating psychometric functions: thresholds, slopes, and lapses of attention.
    Shen Y; Richards VM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):957-67. PubMed ID: 22894217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Further studies of a maximum-likelihood yes-no procedure.
    Gu X; Green DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Jul; 96(1):93-101. PubMed ID: 8064025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A maximum-likelihood method for estimating thresholds in a yes-no task.
    Green DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1993 Apr; 93(4 Pt 1):2096-105. PubMed ID: 8473622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Experience with a yes-no single-interval maximum-likelihood procedure.
    Leek MR; Dubno JR; He N; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 May; 107(5 Pt 1):2674-84. PubMed ID: 10830389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Robust and efficient Bayesian adaptive psychometric function estimation.
    Doire CSJ; Brookes M; Naylor PA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2501. PubMed ID: 28464623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Determining thresholds using adaptive procedures and psychometric fits: evaluating efficiency using theory, simulations, and human experiments.
    Karmali F; Chaudhuri SE; Yi Y; Merfeld DM
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Mar; 234(3):773-89. PubMed ID: 26645306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Utility of a dynamic termination criterion in the ZEST adaptive threshold method.
    Anderson AJ
    Vision Res; 2003 Jan; 43(2):165-70. PubMed ID: 12536138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Estimation of psychometric functions from adaptive tracking procedures.
    Leek MR; Hanna TE; Marshall L
    Percept Psychophys; 1992 Mar; 51(3):247-56. PubMed ID: 1561050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Adaptive affective response identification for hearing threshold detection.
    Doyle TE; Musson D
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2012; 2012():3768-71. PubMed ID: 23366748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Identifying steep psychometric function slope quickly in clinical applications.
    Turpin A; Jankovic D; McKendrick A
    Vision Res; 2010 Nov; 50(23):2476-85. PubMed ID: 20801144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Stimulus selection in adaptive psychophysical procedures.
    Green DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Jun; 87(6):2662-74. PubMed ID: 2373801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. An interleaved tracking procedure to monitor unstable psychometric functions.
    Leek MR; Hanna TE; Marshall L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1991 Sep; 90(3):1385-97. PubMed ID: 1939903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A single-interval adjustment-matrix (SIAM) procedure for unbiased adaptive testing.
    Kaernbach C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Dec; 88(6):2645-55. PubMed ID: 2283438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. MLP: a MATLAB toolbox for rapid and reliable auditory threshold estimation.
    Grassi M; Soranzo A
    Behav Res Methods; 2009 Feb; 41(1):20-28. PubMed ID: 19182120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparing adaptive procedures for estimating the psychometric function for an auditory gap detection task.
    Shen Y
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2013 May; 75(4):771-80. PubMed ID: 23417238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Simple adaptive testing with the weighted up-down method.
    Kaernbach C
    Percept Psychophys; 1991 Mar; 49(3):227-9. PubMed ID: 2011460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Maximum Expected Information Approach for Improving Efficiency of Categorical Loudness Scaling.
    Fultz SE; Neely ST; Kopun JG; Rasetshwane DM
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():578352. PubMed ID: 33281677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Adaptive threshold estimation with unforced-choice tasks.
    Kaernbach C
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1377-88. PubMed ID: 11800463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A procedure for detecting variability of psychophysical thresholds.
    Hall JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Feb; 73(2):663-7. PubMed ID: 6841806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.