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 *

555 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28485649)

  • 21. A comparison of the temporal weighting of annoyance and loudness.
    Dittrich K; Oberfeld D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Dec; 126(6):3168-78. PubMed ID: 20000930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Measurement and modeling of binaural loudness summation for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Moore BC; Gibbs A; Onions G; Glasberg BR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):736-47. PubMed ID: 25096108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Evaluating signal-to-noise ratios, loudness, and related measures as indicators of airborne sound insulation.
    Park HK; Bradley JS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Sep; 126(3):1219-30. PubMed ID: 19739735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Loudness functions with air and bone conduction stimulation in normal-hearing subjects using a categorical loudness scaling procedure.
    Stenfelt S; Zeitooni M
    Hear Res; 2013 Jul; 301():85-92. PubMed ID: 23562775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The annoyance of snoring and psychoacoustic parameters: a step towards an objective measurement.
    Rohrmeier C; Herzog M; Haubner F; Kuehnel TS
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2012 May; 269(5):1537-43. PubMed ID: 22167475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Speech privacy and annoyance considerations in the acoustic environment of passenger cars of high-speed trains.
    Jeon JY; Hong JY; Jang HS; Kim JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Dec; 138(6):3976-84. PubMed ID: 26723351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Can basic auditory and cognitive measures predict hearing-impaired listeners' localization and spatial speech recognition abilities?
    Neher T; Laugesen S; Jensen NS; Kragelund L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1542-58. PubMed ID: 21895093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Penalty for impulse noise, derived from annoyance ratings for impulse and road-traffic sounds.
    Vos J; Smoorenburg GF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1985 Jan; 77(1):193-201. PubMed ID: 3973214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Near-threshold equal-loudness contours for harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) derived from reaction times during underwater audiometry: a preliminary study.
    Kastelein RA; Wensveen PJ; Terhune JM; de Jong CA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jan; 129(1):488-95. PubMed ID: 21303029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Loudness of sounds with a subcritical bandwidth: a challenge to current loudness models?
    Hots J; Rennies J; Verhey JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):EL334-9. PubMed ID: 24116539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Relation between loudness in categorical units and loudness in phons and sones.
    Heeren W; Hohmann V; Appell JE; Verhey JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Apr; 133(4):EL314-9. PubMed ID: 23556697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. An Optimization Study on Listening Experiments to Improve the Comparability of Annoyance Ratings of Noise Samples from Different Experimental Sample Sets.
    Di G; Lu K; Shi X
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2018 Mar; 15(3):. PubMed ID: 29518036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluation of annoyance from low frequency noise under laboratory conditions.
    Pawlaczyk-Luszczynska M; Dudarewicz A; Szymczak W; Sliwinska-Kowalska M
    Noise Health; 2010; 12(48):166-81. PubMed ID: 20603573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Does enriched acoustic environment in humans abolish chronic tinnitus clinically and electrophysiologically? A double blind placebo controlled study.
    Vanneste S; van Dongen M; De Vree B; Hiseni S; van der Velden E; Strydis C; Joos K; Norena A; Serdijn W; De Ridder D
    Hear Res; 2013 Feb; 296():141-8. PubMed ID: 23104014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Auditory Distraction and Acclimatization to Hearing Aids.
    Dawes P; Munro KJ
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):174-183. PubMed ID: 27564230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Thresholds of discomfort for complex stimuli: acoustic and sound-quality predictors.
    Warner RL; Bender RA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Oct; 45(5):1016-26. PubMed ID: 12381057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Differences in subjective loudness and annoyance depending on the road traffic noise spectrum.
    Torija AJ; Flindell IH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 24437739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Perceptual assessment of quality of urban soundscapes with combined noise sources and water sounds.
    Jeon JY; Lee PJ; You J; Kang J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Mar; 127(3):1357-66. PubMed ID: 20329835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Sound quality characteristics of refrigerator noise in real living environments with relation to psychoacoustical and autocorrelation function parameters.
    Sato S; You J; Jeon JY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Jul; 122(1):314-25. PubMed ID: 17614491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Spectro-temporal weighting of loudness.
    Oberfeld D; Heeren W; Rennies J; Verhey J
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(11):e50184. PubMed ID: 23209670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 28.