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 *

205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34796771)

  • 21. Comparison of pure tone audiometry and auditory steady-state responses in subjects with normal hearing and hearing loss.
    Ozdek A; Karacay M; Saylam G; Tatar E; Aygener N; Korkmaz MH
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2010 Jan; 267(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 19536554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Accuracy of automated pure-tone audiometry in population-based samples of older adults.
    Hoff M; Göthberg H; Tengstrand T; Rosenhall U; Skoog I; Sadeghi A
    Int J Audiol; 2024 Aug; 63(8):622-630. PubMed ID: 37335133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Validity of diagnostic pure-tone audiometry without a sound-treated environment in older adults.
    Maclennan-Smith F; Swanepoel de W; Hall JW
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Feb; 52(2):66-73. PubMed ID: 23140522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Adult validation of a self-administered tablet audiometer.
    Bastianelli M; Mark AE; McAfee A; Schramm D; Lefrançois R; Bromwich M
    J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2019 Nov; 48(1):59. PubMed ID: 31699157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Validity of automated threshold audiometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Mahomed F; Swanepoel de W; Eikelboom RH; Soer M
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(6):745-52. PubMed ID: 24165302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Clinical validation of automated audiometry with continuous noise-monitoring in a clinically heterogeneous population outside a sound-treated environment.
    Brennan-Jones CG; Eikelboom RH; Swanepoel de W; Friedland PL; Atlas MD
    Int J Audiol; 2016 Sep; 55(9):507-13. PubMed ID: 27206551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Predicting the degree of hearing loss using click auditory brainstem response in babies referred from newborn hearing screening.
    Baldwin M; Watkin P
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):361-9. PubMed ID: 23340456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Fixed-Level Frequency Threshold Testing for Ototoxicity Monitoring.
    Rieke CC; Clavier OH; Allen LV; Anderson AP; Brooks CA; Fellows AM; Brungart DS; Buckey JC
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(6):e369-e375. PubMed ID: 28362673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparisons of air-conduction hearing thresholds between manual and automated methods in a commercial audiometer.
    Liu H; Fu X; Li M; Wang S
    Front Neurosci; 2023; 17():1292395. PubMed ID: 38188027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Comparison of the hearing threshold measured by manual pure-tone and by self-recording (Békésy) audiometry.
    Erlandsson B; Håkanson H; Ivarsson A; Nilsson P
    Audiology; 1979; 18(5):414-29. PubMed ID: 496724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Smartphone hearing screening with integrated quality control and data management.
    Swanepoel de W; Myburgh HC; Howe DM; Mahomed F; Eikelboom RH
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Dec; 53(12):841-9. PubMed ID: 24998412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The relation between the pure-tone audiogram and the click auditory brainstem response threshold in cochlear hearing loss.
    van der Drift JF; Brocaar MP; van Zanten GA
    Audiology; 1987; 26(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 3593096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Hearing screening with portable screening pure-tone audiometer and distortion-product otoacoustic emissions.
    Wang YF; Wang SS; Tai CC; Lin LC; Shiao AS
    Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi (Taipei); 2002 Jun; 65(6):285-92. PubMed ID: 12201570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Comparison of air-conduction and bone-conduction hearing thresholds for pure tones and octave-band filtered sound effects.
    Abouchacra KS; Letowski T
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1999 Sep; 10(8):422-8. PubMed ID: 10813642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Distribution characteristics of normal pure-tone thresholds.
    Margolis RH; Wilson RH; Popelka GR; Eikelboom RH; Swanepoel de W; Saly GL
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(11):796-805. PubMed ID: 25938502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Description of a new low-cost and open-source audiometer and its validation with normal-hearing listeners: The Aupiometer.
    Isnard V; Chastres V; Andéol G
    PLoS One; 2024; 19(8):e0306751. PubMed ID: 39121097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Online Machine Learning Audiometry.
    Barbour DL; Howard RT; Song XD; Metzger N; Sukesan KA; DiLorenzo JC; Snyder BRD; Chen JY; Degen EA; Buchbinder JM; Heisey KL
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):918-926. PubMed ID: 30358656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.