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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3700858)

  • 41. Lateralization and frequency selectivity in normal and impaired hearing.
    Buus S; Scharf B; Florentine M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 Jul; 76(1):77-86. PubMed ID: 6747115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Auditory frequency selectivity in normal and presbycusic subjects.
    Margolis R; Goldberg SM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1980 Sep; 23(3):603-13. PubMed ID: 7421162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Effects of hearing impairment and presentation level on masking period patterns for Schroeder-phase harmonic complexes.
    Summers V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Nov; 108(5 Pt 1):2307-17. PubMed ID: 11108371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Quantifying psychoacoustic tuning curves for clinical use.
    Densert B; Kinberger B; Arlinger S; Densert O
    Scand Audiol; 1986; 15(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 3749782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Growth of low-pass masking of pure tones and speech for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners.
    Dubno JR; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1995 Dec; 98(6):3113-24. PubMed ID: 8550937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Psychophysical suppression of selective portions of pulsation threshold patterns.
    Shannon RV
    Hear Res; 1986; 21(3):257-60. PubMed ID: 3722005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Psychophysical suppression effects for tonal and speech signals.
    Dubno JR; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Oct; 110(4):2108-19. PubMed ID: 11681388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. [Effect of stimulus rise time and high-pass masking on early auditory evoked potentials].
    Bunke D; von Specht H; Mühler R; Pethe J; Kevanishvili Z
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1998 Apr; 77(4):185-90. PubMed ID: 9592750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Click-evoked oto-acoustic emissions in normal and hearing-impaired adults.
    Stevens JC
    Br J Audiol; 1988 Feb; 22(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 3365523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Pitch discrimination for complex sounds in normal and hearing impaired ears.
    Filipo R; Orlando MP; Cananzi A; Grandori F
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1986; 25():159-64. PubMed ID: 3472320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Decision strategies of hearing-impaired listeners in spectral shape discrimination.
    Lentz JJ; Leek MR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Mar; 111(3):1389-98. PubMed ID: 11931316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. The influence of hearing-aid compression on forward-masked thresholds for adults with hearing loss.
    Brennan MA; McCreery RW; Jesteadt W
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Oct; 138(4):2589-97. PubMed ID: 26520341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Linearized response growth inferred from growth-of-masking slopes in ears with cochlear hearing loss.
    Nelson DA; Schroder AC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 Apr; 101(4):2186-201. PubMed ID: 9104021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Masking patterns in the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana). II: Physiological effects.
    Freedman EG; Ferragamo M; Simmons AM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1988 Dec; 84(6):2081-91. PubMed ID: 3265711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Summation bandwidths at threshold in normal and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Higgins MB; Turner CW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Dec; 88(6):2625-30. PubMed ID: 2283435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. [Frequency-dependent cochlear microphonics in inner ear hearing loss with various pitch thresholds].
    Marangos N; Hesse G; Mausolf A
    HNO; 1989 Jan; 37(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 2917880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Psychometric functions for level discrimination in cochlearly impaired and normal listeners with equivalent-threshold masking.
    Buus S; Florentine M; Zwicker T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1995 Aug; 98(2 Pt 1):853-61. PubMed ID: 7642824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Differential sensitivity to tonal frequency and to the rate of amplitude modulation of broadband noise by normally hearing listeners.
    Formby C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1985 Jul; 78(1 Pt 1):70-7. PubMed ID: 4019909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Stimulus features affecting psychophysical detection thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. I: Phase duration and stimulus duration.
    Pfingst BE; DeHaan DR; Holloway LA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1991 Oct; 90(4 Pt 1):1857-66. PubMed ID: 1960279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Recognition of nonsense syllables by hearing-impaired listeners and by noise-masked normal hearers.
    Humes LE; Dirks DD; Bell TS; Kincaid GE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1987 Mar; 81(3):765-73. PubMed ID: 3584685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.