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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21417674)

  • 1. AMTAS(®): automated method for testing auditory sensitivity: II. air conduction audiograms in children and adults.
    Margolis RH; Frisina R; Walton JP
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jul; 50(7):434-9. PubMed ID: 21417674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical validation of the AMTAS automated audiometer.
    Eikelboom RH; Swanepoel de W; Motakef S; Upson GS
    Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):342-9. PubMed ID: 23548148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. AMTAS(®): automated method for testing auditory sensitivity: III. sensorineural hearing loss and air-bone gaps.
    Margolis RH; Moore BC
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jul; 50(7):440-7. PubMed ID: 21668325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. AMTAS: automated method for testing auditory sensitivity: validation studies.
    Margolis RH; Glasberg BR; Creeke S; Moore BC
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Mar; 49(3):185-94. PubMed ID: 20109081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Validation of the Home Hearing Test™.
    Margolis RH; Killion MC; Bratt GW; Saly GL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 May; 27(5):416-420. PubMed ID: 27179261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Automated hearing tests: applying the otogram to patients who are difficult to test.
    Yu J; Ostevik A; Hodgetts B; Ho A
    J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2011 Oct; 40(5):376-83. PubMed ID: 22420392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Hearing assessment-reliability, accuracy, and efficiency of automated audiometry.
    Swanepoel de W; Mngemane S; Molemong S; Mkwanazi H; Tutshini S
    Telemed J E Health; 2010 Jun; 16(5):557-63. PubMed ID: 20575723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Computer-assisted audiometry versus manual audiometry.
    Ho AT; Hildreth AJ; Lindsey L
    Otol Neurotol; 2009 Oct; 30(7):876-83. PubMed ID: 20179426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Reliability and accuracy of a method of adjustment for self-measurement of auditory thresholds.
    Van Tasell DJ; Folkeard P
    Otol Neurotol; 2013 Jan; 34(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 23202154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of auditory steady-state responses and auditory brainstem responses in audiometric assessment of adults with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Lin YH; Ho HC; Wu HP
    Auris Nasus Larynx; 2009 Apr; 36(2):140-5. PubMed ID: 18620826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long-term audiometric follow-up of click-evoked auditory brainstem response in hearing-impaired infants.
    Schoonhoven R; Lamoré PJ; de Laat JA; Grote JJ
    Audiology; 2000; 39(3):135-45. PubMed ID: 10905399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Diagnostic Hearing Assessment in Schools: Validity and Time Efficiency of Automated Audiometry.
    Mahomed-Asmail F; Swanepoel de W; Eikelboom RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Jan; 27(1):42-8. PubMed ID: 26809325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Distribution characteristics of normal pure-tone thresholds.
    Margolis RH; Wilson RH; Popelka GR; Eikelboom RH; Swanepoel de W; Saly GL
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(11):796-805. PubMed ID: 25938502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Qualind: A method for assessing the accuracy of automated tests.
    Margolis RH; Saly GL; Le C; Laurence J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2007 Jan; 18(1):78-89. PubMed ID: 17252960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Development and evaluation of a tablet-based diagnostic audiometer.
    Thoidis I; Vrysis L; Markou K; Papanikolaou G
    Int J Audiol; 2019 Aug; 58(8):476-483. PubMed ID: 30987489
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Automated hearing screening for children: A pilot study in China.
    Kam AC; Gao H; Li LK; Zhao H; Qiu S; Tong MC
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Dec; 52(12):855-60. PubMed ID: 24059596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Validation of a Self-Administered Audiometry Application: An Equivalence Study.
    Whitton JP; Hancock KE; Shannon JM; Polley DB
    Laryngoscope; 2016 Oct; 126(10):2382-8. PubMed ID: 27140227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Validity of diagnostic pure-tone audiometry without a sound-treated environment in older adults.
    Maclennan-Smith F; Swanepoel de W; Hall JW
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Feb; 52(2):66-73. PubMed ID: 23140522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.