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 *

168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28906239)

  • 21. Screening Test for Auditory Processing (STAP): a preliminary report.
    Yathiraj A; Maggu AR
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):867-78. PubMed ID: 24224993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Realistic Environment Audiometric Booth: Development and Clinical Validation.
    Vigliano M; Huarte A; Borro D; Lasarte U; Manrique Rodriguez MJ
    Audiol Neurootol; 2021; 26(5):317-326. PubMed ID: 33631766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. High-frequency thresholds: sound suite versus hospital room.
    Valente M; Potts LG; Valente M; French-St George M; Goebel J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1992 Jul; 3(4):287-94. PubMed ID: 1421462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Adaptive tests of temporal resolution: comparison with the gaps-in-noise test in normal-hearing young adults.
    Wong AC; McPherson B
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jan; 54(1):29-36. PubMed ID: 25517630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Mild-Gain Hearing Aids as a Treatment for Adults with Self-Reported Hearing Difficulties.
    Roup CM; Post E; Lewis J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Jun; 29(6):477-494. PubMed ID: 29863462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Active noise reduction audiometry: a prospective analysis of a new approach to noise management in audiometric testing.
    Bromwich MA; Parsa V; Lanthier N; Yoo J; Parnes LS
    Laryngoscope; 2008 Jan; 118(1):104-9. PubMed ID: 18043495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The listening in spatialized noise test: an auditory processing disorder study.
    Cameron S; Dillon H; Newall P
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2006 May; 17(5):306-20. PubMed ID: 16796298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Temporal processing in low-frequency channels: effects of age and hearing loss in middle-aged listeners.
    Leigh-Paffenroth ED; Elangovan S
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):393-404. PubMed ID: 21993047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The Relationship between Random Gap Detection and Hearing in Noise Test Performances.
    Heeke P; Vermiglio AJ; Bulla E; Velappan K; Fang X
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018; 29(10):948-954. PubMed ID: 30479267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Clinical evaluation and test-retest reliability of the IHR-McCormick Automated Toy Discrimination Test.
    Summerfield Q; Palmer AR; Foster JR; Marshall DH; Twomey T
    Br J Audiol; 1994 Jun; 28(3):165-79. PubMed ID: 7841901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Auditory processing following consecutive right temporal lobe resections: a prospective case study.
    Nagle S; Musiek FE; Kossoff EH; Jallo G; Boatman-Reich D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013; 24(7):535-43. PubMed ID: 24047941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Identification of conductive hearing loss using air conduction tests alone: reliability and validity of an automatic test battery.
    Convery E; Keidser G; Seeto M; Freeston K; Zhou D; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(1):e1-8. PubMed ID: 24080948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Perspectives on the Pure-Tone Audiogram.
    Musiek FE; Shinn J; Chermak GD; Bamiou DE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017; 28(7):655-671. PubMed ID: 28722648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. A comparison of two word-recognition tasks in multitalker babble: Speech Recognition in Noise Test (SPRINT) and Words-in-Noise Test (WIN).
    Wilson RH; Cates WB
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2008; 19(7):548-56. PubMed ID: 19248731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Validation of a Computer-Administered Version of the Digits-in-Noise Test for Hearing Screening in the United States.
    Folmer RL; Vachhani J; McMillan GP; Watson C; Kidd GR; Feeney MP
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Feb; 28(2):161-169. PubMed ID: 28240983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Xylene-induced auditory dysfunction in humans.
    Fuente A; McPherson B; Cardemil F
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):651-60. PubMed ID: 23598724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Reference values of selected auditory temporal processing tests for Polish school children.
    Szkiełkowska A; Włodarczyk E; Piłka A
    Otolaryngol Pol; 2018 Sep; 72(6):31-36. PubMed ID: 30647200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.