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 *

252 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27140227)

  • 21. Clinical evaluation of a computerized self-administered hearing test.
    Kam AC; Sung JK; Lee T; Wong TK; van Hasselt A
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Aug; 51(8):606-10. PubMed ID: 22676699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Clinical validation of automated audiometry with continuous noise-monitoring in a clinically heterogeneous population outside a sound-treated environment.
    Brennan-Jones CG; Eikelboom RH; Swanepoel de W; Friedland PL; Atlas MD
    Int J Audiol; 2016 Sep; 55(9):507-13. PubMed ID: 27206551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Validity of diagnostic computer-based air and forehead bone conduction audiometry.
    Swanepoel de W; Biagio L
    J Occup Environ Hyg; 2011 Apr; 8(4):210-4. PubMed ID: 21391065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The Emerging Future of Mobile Audiometry: A Prospective Validation Study of the Mimi Hearing Test Application.
    Moazzami C; Gagnon C; Bertrand L; Saliba I; Saliba J
    Otol Neurotol; 2024 Aug; 45(7):740-744. PubMed ID: 38942612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Mobile audiometry for hearing threshold assessment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Oremule B; Abbas J; Saunders G; Kluk K; Isba R; Bate S; Bruce I
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2024 Jan; 49(1):74-86. PubMed ID: 37828806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Validity of automated threshold audiometry in school aged children.
    Govender SM; Mars M
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Feb; 105():97-102. PubMed ID: 29447828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Ambient noise impact on accuracy of automated hearing assessment.
    Storey KK; Muñoz K; Nelson L; Larsen J; White K
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Oct; 53(10):730-6. PubMed ID: 24909592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Self-administered hearing loss screening using an interactive, tablet play audiometer with ear bud headphones.
    Yeung JC; Heley S; Beauregard Y; Champagne S; Bromwich MA
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2015 Aug; 79(8):1248-52. PubMed ID: 26055197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Development and Validation of a Portable Hearing Self-Testing System Based on a Notebook Personal Computer.
    Liu Y; Yang D; Xiong F; Yu L; Ji F; Wang QJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Sep; 26(8):716-723. PubMed ID: 26333879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Hearing Tests on Mobile Devices: Evaluation of the Reference Sound Level by Means of Biological Calibration.
    Masalski M; Kipiński L; Grysiński T; Kręcicki T
    J Med Internet Res; 2016 May; 18(5):e130. PubMed ID: 27241793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Relationship between Mandarin speech reception thresholds and pure-tone thresholds in the geriatric population.
    Chien CH; Tu TY; Chien SF; Li AC; Yang MJ; Shiao AS; Wang YF
    J Formos Med Assoc; 2006 Oct; 105(10):832-8. PubMed ID: 17000456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Validity of automated threshold audiometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Mahomed F; Swanepoel de W; Eikelboom RH; Soer M
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(6):745-52. PubMed ID: 24165302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Validation of a portable hearing assessment tool: Agilis Health Mobile Audiogram.
    Manganella JL; Stiles DJ; Kawai K; Barrett DL; O'Brien LB; Kenna MA
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Oct; 113():94-98. PubMed ID: 30174018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.