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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32840175)

  • 21. Factors affecting psychophysical tuning curves for hearing-impaired subjects with high-frequency dead regions.
    Kluk K; Moore BC
    Hear Res; 2005 Feb; 200(1-2):115-31. PubMed ID: 15668043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Distortion product otoacoustic emission contralateral suppression functions obtained with ramped stimuli.
    Purcell DW; Butler BE; Saunders TJ; Allen P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Oct; 124(4):2133-48. PubMed ID: 19062854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Exploration of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning in hearing-impaired listeners.
    Charaziak KK; Souza PE; Siegel JH
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Feb; 54(2):96-105. PubMed ID: 25290042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Diagnosing cochlear dead regions in children.
    Malicka AN; Munro KJ; Baker RJ
    Ear Hear; 2010 Apr; 31(2):238-46. PubMed ID: 19935424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Response properties of cochlear efferent neurons: monaural vs. binaural stimulation and the effects of noise.
    Liberman MC
    J Neurophysiol; 1988 Nov; 60(5):1779-98. PubMed ID: 3199181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Auditory filter tuning inferred with short sinusoidal and notched-noise maskers.
    Jennings SG; Strickland EA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):2497-513. PubMed ID: 23039444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evaluating the effects of olivocochlear feedback on psychophysical measures of frequency selectivity.
    Jennings SG; Strickland EA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):2483-96. PubMed ID: 23039443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Interaction of Musicianship and Aging: A Comparison of Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials.
    O'Brien JL; Nikjeh DA; Lister JJ
    Behav Neurol; 2015; 2015():545917. PubMed ID: 26504354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Musician enhancement for speech-in-noise.
    Parbery-Clark A; Skoe E; Lam C; Kraus N
    Ear Hear; 2009 Dec; 30(6):653-61. PubMed ID: 19734788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions, threshold microstructure, and psychophysical tuning over a wide frequency range in humans.
    Baiduc RR; Lee J; Dhar S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):300-14. PubMed ID: 24437770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The impact of musicianship on the cortical mechanisms related to separating speech from background noise.
    Zendel BR; Tremblay CD; Belleville S; Peretz I
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2015 May; 27(5):1044-59. PubMed ID: 25390195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Musicianship enhances ipsilateral and contralateral efferent gain control to the cochlea.
    Bidelman GM; Schneider AD; Heitzmann VR; Bhagat SP
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():275-283. PubMed ID: 27964936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Reflex control of the human inner ear: a half-octave offset in medial efferent feedback that is consistent with an efferent role in the control of masking.
    Lilaonitkul W; Guinan JJ
    J Neurophysiol; 2009 Mar; 101(3):1394-406. PubMed ID: 19118109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Preattentive cortical-evoked responses to pure tones, harmonic tones, and speech: influence of music training.
    Nikjeh DA; Lister JJ; Frisch SA
    Ear Hear; 2009 Aug; 30(4):432-46. PubMed ID: 19494778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Implementation of a fast method for measuring psychophysical tuning curves.
    Sęk A; Moore BC
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):237-42. PubMed ID: 21299376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Acoustic distortion as a measure of frequency selectivity: relation to psychophysical equivalent rectangular bandwidth.
    Brown AM; Gaskill SA; Carlyon RP; Williams DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1993 Jun; 93(6):3291-7. PubMed ID: 8326057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Psychoacoustic analyses of cochlear mechanisms in tinnitus patients with normal auditory thresholds.
    Buzo BC; Carvallo RM
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Jan; 53(1):40-7. PubMed ID: 24168288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Detecting dead regions using psychophysical tuning curves: a comparison of simultaneous and forward masking.
    Kluk K; Moore BC
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Aug; 45(8):463-76. PubMed ID: 17005489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The association of noise sensitivity with music listening, training, and aptitude.
    Kliuchko M; Heinonen-Guzejev M; Monacis L; Gold BP; Heikkilä KV; Spinosa V; Tervaniemi M; Brattico E
    Noise Health; 2015; 17(78):350-7. PubMed ID: 26356378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Refining the measurement of psychophysical tuning curves.
    Moore BC; Glasberg BR; Roberts B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 Oct; 76(4):1057-66. PubMed ID: 6501701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.