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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35176804)

  • 1. Automated Forced-Choice Tests of Speech Recognition.
    Margolis RH; Wilson RH; Saly GL; Gregoire HM; Madsen BM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 Oct; 32(9):606-615. PubMed ID: 35176804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A Comparison of Word-Recognition Performances on the Auditec and VA Recorded Versions of Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 by Young Listeners with Normal Hearing and by Older Listeners with Sensorineural Hearing Loss Using a Randomized Presentation-Level Paradigm.
    Wilson RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 May; 30(5):370-395. PubMed ID: 30969910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Development of the Word Auditory Recognition and Recall Measure: A Working Memory Test for Use in Rehabilitative Audiology.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Alexander G
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e360-e376. PubMed ID: 27438869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
    Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparison of recognition performances in speech-spectrum noise by listeners with normal hearing on PB-50, CID W-22, NU-6, W-1 spondaic words, and monosyllabic digits spoken by the same speaker.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R; Roberts H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2008 Jun; 19(6):496-506. PubMed ID: 19253782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Can Closed-Set Word Recognition Differentially Assess Vowel and Consonant Perception for School-Age Children With and Without Hearing Loss?
    Buss E; Felder J; Miller MK; Leibold LJ; Calandruccio L
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Oct; 65(10):3934-3950. PubMed ID: 36194777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Speech recognition and just-follow-conversation tasks for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners with different maskers.
    Larsby B; Arlinger S
    Audiology; 1994; 33(3):165-76. PubMed ID: 8042937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interrupted Monosyllabic Words: The Effects of Ten Interruption Locations on Recognition Performance by Older Listeners with Sensorineural Hearing Loss.
    Wilson RH; Sharrett KC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Jan; 28(1):68-79. PubMed ID: 28054913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Predicted and measured speech recognition performance in noise with linear amplification.
    Magnusson L; Karlsson M; Leijon A
    Ear Hear; 2001 Feb; 22(1):46-57. PubMed ID: 11271975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Examination of the neighborhood activation theory in normal and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Dirks DD; Takayanagi S; Moshfegh A; Noffsinger PD; Fausti SA
    Ear Hear; 2001 Feb; 22(1):1-13. PubMed ID: 11271971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Relation between pure tone audiometry and speech audiometry in various hearing-impaired listeners].
    He LP
    Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 1993; 28(1):29-31, 59. PubMed ID: 8352994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Normal and hearing-impaired word recognition scores for monosyllabic words in quiet and noise.
    Beattie RC; Barr T; Roup C
    Br J Audiol; 1997 Jun; 31(3):153-64. PubMed ID: 9276098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Identifying Subclinical Hearing Loss: Extended Audiometry and Word Recognition in Noise.
    Drennan WR
    Audiol Neurootol; 2022; 27(3):217-226. PubMed ID: 34727540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Understanding excessive SNR loss in hearing-impaired listeners.
    Grant KW; Walden TC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr; 24(4):258-73; quiz 337-8. PubMed ID: 23636208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of the Carrier Phrase on Word Recognition Performances by Younger and Older Listeners Using Two Stimulus Paradigms.
    Wilson RH; Sanchez VA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 Jun; 31(6):412-441. PubMed ID: 31968207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Revised Speech Perception in Noise Test (R-SPIN) in a multiple signal-to-noise ratio paradigm.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R; Watts KL; Smith SL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 Sep; 23(8):590-605. PubMed ID: 22967734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss, and age in children with impaired hearing.
    Blamey PJ; Sarant JZ; Paatsch LE; Barry JG; Bow CP; Wales RJ; Wright M; Psarros C; Rattigan K; Tooher R
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2001 Apr; 44(2):264-85. PubMed ID: 11324650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cortical auditory-evoked potentials (CAEPs) in adults in response to filtered speech stimuli.
    Carter L; Dillon H; Seymour J; Seeto M; Van Dun B
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):807-22. PubMed ID: 24224988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.