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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33769849)

  • 41. The influence of listener training on the perceptual assessment of hypernasality.
    Oliveira AC; Scarmagnani RH; Fukushiro AP; Yamashita RP
    Codas; 2016 Apr; 28(2):141-8. PubMed ID: 27191877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Perceptual Error Identification of Human and Synthesized Voices.
    Englert M; Madazio G; Gielow I; Lucero J; Behlau M
    J Voice; 2016 Sep; 30(5):639.e17-23. PubMed ID: 26337775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Do Standard Instrumental Acoustic, Perceptual, and Subjective Voice Outcomes Indicate Therapy Success in Patients With Functional Dysphonia?
    Reetz S; Bohlender JE; Brockmann-Bauser M
    J Voice; 2019 May; 33(3):317-324. PubMed ID: 29395329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Effect of direct and indirect voice training in Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology students.
    Santos AC; Borrego MC; Behlau M
    Codas; 2015; 27(4):384-91. PubMed ID: 26398263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Repetition of anchor stimuli and nature of vocal samples in the perceptual auditory judgment performed by speech-language pathology students.
    Bispo NO; Yamasaki R; Padovani MMP; Behlau M
    Codas; 2022; 34(4):e20210064. PubMed ID: 35081197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Perceptual and Quantitative Assessment of Dysphonia Across Vowel Categories.
    Anand S; Skowronski MD; Shrivastav R; Eddins DA
    J Voice; 2019 Jul; 33(4):473-481. PubMed ID: 29804803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The cut-off analysis using visual analogue scale and cepstral assessments on severity of voice disorder.
    Lee YW; Kim GH; Bae IH; Park HJ; Wang SG; Kwon SB
    Logoped Phoniatr Vocol; 2018 Dec; 43(4):175-180. PubMed ID: 29671679
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Student training to perceptually assess severity of dysphonia using the dysphonic severity percentage scale.
    Schaeffer N
    J Voice; 2013 Sep; 27(5):611-6. PubMed ID: 23876942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Effect of Performance Time of the Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Exercises in Dysphonic Children.
    Ramos LA; Gama ACC
    J Voice; 2017 May; 31(3):329-335. PubMed ID: 27658337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Comparison of Rater's reliability on perceptual evaluation of different types of voice sample.
    Law T; Kim JH; Lee KY; Tang EC; Lam JH; van Hasselt AC; Tong MC
    J Voice; 2012 Sep; 26(5):666.e13-21. PubMed ID: 22243971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The Relationship Between Auditory-Perceptual Rating Scales and Objective Voice Measures in Children With Voice Disorders.
    Fujiki RB; Thibeault SL
    Am J Speech Lang Pathol; 2021 Jan; 30(1):228-238. PubMed ID: 33439742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. The Effect of Telephone Transmission on Voice Quality Perception.
    Passetti RR; Constantini AC
    J Voice; 2019 Sep; 33(5):649-658. PubMed ID: 30146232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Evaluating the Effect of Voice Quality Covariance on Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation Using a Novel Two-Dimensional Magnitude Estimation Task.
    Anand S; Park Y; Shrivastav R; Eddins DA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2023 Dec; 66(12):4849-4859. PubMed ID: 37902504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Reliability and confidence in using a paired comparison paradigm in perceptual voice quality evaluation.
    Yiu EM; Chan KM; Mok RS
    Clin Linguist Phon; 2007 Feb; 21(2):129-45. PubMed ID: 17364621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Interactions Between Breathy and Rough Voice Qualities and Their Contributions to Overall Dysphonia Severity.
    Park Y; Anand S; Kopf LM; Shrivastav R; Eddins DA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Nov; 65(11):4071-4084. PubMed ID: 36260821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. The Exploration of an Objective Model for Roughness With Several Acoustic Markers.
    Latoszek BBV; De Bodt M; Gerrits E; Maryn Y
    J Voice; 2018 Mar; 32(2):149-161. PubMed ID: 28572016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Perceptual Judgment of Voice Quality in Nondysphonic French Speakers: Effect of Task-, Speaker- and Listener-Related Variables.
    Delvaux V; Pillot-Loiseau C
    J Voice; 2020 Sep; 34(5):682-693. PubMed ID: 30922738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice Quality of Cochlear-implanted and Normal-hearing Individuals: A Reliability Study.
    Coelho AC; Brasolotto AG; Fernandes ACN; de Souza Medved DM; da Silva EM; Júnior FB
    J Voice; 2017 Nov; 31(6):774.e1-774.e8. PubMed ID: 28318969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Agreement between Transcription- and Rating-Based Intelligibility Measurements for Evaluation of Dysphonic Speech in Noise.
    Ishikawa K; Webster J; Ketring C
    Clin Linguist Phon; 2021 Oct; 35(10):983-995. PubMed ID: 33251880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Effect of Dysphonia and Cognitive-Perceptual Listener Strategies on Speech Intelligibility.
    Porcaro CK; Evitts PM; King N; Hood C; Campbell E; White L; Veraguas J
    J Voice; 2020 Sep; 34(5):806.e7-806.e18. PubMed ID: 31031103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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