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 *

202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34034339)

  • 1. Automated Audiometry in Quiet and Simulated Exam Room Noise for Listeners with Normal Hearing and Impaired Hearing.
    Bean BN; Roberts RA; Picou EM; Angley GP; Edwards AJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2022 Jan; 33(1):6-13. PubMed ID: 34034339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of Mobile-Based Audiometry in the Evaluation of Hearing Loss in Quiet and Noisy Environments.
    Saliba J; Al-Reefi M; Carriere JS; Verma N; Provencal C; Rappaport JM
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2017 Apr; 156(4):706-711. PubMed ID: 28025906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Smartphone-Facilitated In-Situ Hearing Aid Audiometry for Community-Based Hearing Testing.
    Frisby C; De Sousa KC; Eikelboom RH; Mahomed-Asmail F; Moore DR; de Kock T; Manchaiah V; Swanepoel W
    Ear Hear; 2024 Jul-Aug 01; 45(4):1019-1032. PubMed ID: 38424667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The relationship between high-frequency pure-tone hearing loss, hearing in noise test (HINT) thresholds, and the articulation index.
    Vermiglio AJ; Soli SD; Freed DJ; Fisher LM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(10):779-88. PubMed ID: 23169195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Clinical experience with the words-in-noise test on 3430 veterans: comparisons with pure-tone thresholds and word recognition in quiet.
    Wilson RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):405-23. PubMed ID: 21993048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Ambient Noise Monitoring during Pure-Tone Audiometry.
    Margolis RH; Saly GL; Wilson RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2022 Jan; 33(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 35817024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Utilizing True Wireless Stereo Earbuds in Automated Pure-Tone Audiometry.
    Guo Z; Yu G; Zhou H; Wang X; Lu Y; Meng Q
    Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211057367. PubMed ID: 34796771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Pure-Tone Audiometry With Forward Pressure Level Calibration Leads to Clinically-Relevant Improvements in Test-Retest Reliability.
    Lapsley Miller JA; Reed CM; Robinson SR; Perez ZD
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(5):946-957. PubMed ID: 29470259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Diagnostic Hearing Assessment in Schools: Validity and Time Efficiency of Automated Audiometry.
    Mahomed-Asmail F; Swanepoel de W; Eikelboom RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Jan; 27(1):42-8. PubMed ID: 26809325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Adapting Audiology Procedures During the Pandemic: Validity and Efficacy of Testing Outside a Sound Booth.
    Serpanos YC; Hobbs M; Nunez K; Gambino L; Butler J
    Am J Audiol; 2022 Mar; 31(1):91-100. PubMed ID: 34965363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Clinical validation of the AMTAS automated audiometer.
    Eikelboom RH; Swanepoel de W; Motakef S; Upson GS
    Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):342-9. PubMed ID: 23548148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reliability of the Home Hearing Test: Implications for Public Health.
    Mosley CL; Langley LM; Davis A; McMahon CM; Tremblay KL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 Mar; 30(3):208-216. PubMed ID: 30461396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Measuring Temporal Resolution (Release of Masking) with a Hughson-Westlake Up-Down Instead of a Békèsy-Tracking Procedure.
    Rhebergen KS; van Esch TE; Dreschler WA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Jun; 26(6):563-71. PubMed ID: 26134723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Pure-tone audiometry outside a sound booth using earphone attentuation, integrated noise monitoring, and automation.
    Swanepoel de W; Matthysen C; Eikelboom RH; Clark JL; Hall JW
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(11):777-85. PubMed ID: 26514954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.