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 *

203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3767222)

  • 21. Efficacy of earphones for 12- to 24-month-old children during visual reinforcement audiometry.
    Weiss AD; Karzon RK; Ead B; Lieu JE
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55(4):248-53. PubMed ID: 26903087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Interaural attenuation using insert earphones: electrocochleographic approach.
    Sobhy OA; Gould HJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1993 Mar; 4(2):76-9. PubMed ID: 8471788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A version of the TEN Test for use with ER-3A insert earphones.
    Moore BC; Creeke S; Glasberg BR; Stone MA; Sek A
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(4):554-7. PubMed ID: 22436409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Middle ear pathology can affect the ear-canal sound pressure generated by audiologic earphones.
    Voss SE; Rosowski JJ; Merchant SN; Thornton AR; Shera CA; Peake WT
    Ear Hear; 2000 Aug; 21(4):265-74. PubMed ID: 10981602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Coupling of earphones to human ears and to standard coupler.
    Cirić DG; Hammershøi D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Oct; 120(4):2096-107. PubMed ID: 17069307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Relationship between transducer type and low-frequency hearing loss for patients with ventilation tubes.
    Tokar-Prejna S; Meinzen-Derr J
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2006 Jun; 70(6):1063-7. PubMed ID: 16364457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A comparison of the variability in thresholds measured with insert and conventional supra-aural earphones.
    Lindgren F
    Scand Audiol; 1990; 19(1):19-23. PubMed ID: 2336535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effects of tubing length and coupling method on hearing threshold and real-ear to coupler difference measures.
    Gustafson S; Pittman A; Fanning R
    Am J Audiol; 2013 Jun; 22(1):190-9. PubMed ID: 23800818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evidence on the efficacy of insert earphone and sound field VRA with young infants.
    Day J; Bamford J; Parry G; Shepherd M; Quigley A
    Br J Audiol; 2000 Dec; 34(6):329-34. PubMed ID: 11201319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Boothless audiometry: Ambient noise considerations.
    Meinke DK; Martin WH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2023 Jan; 153(1):26. PubMed ID: 36732250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Equivalent threshold sound pressure levels (ETSPL) for Sennheiser HDA 280 supra-aural audiometric earphones in the frequency range 125 Hz to 8000 Hz.
    Poulsen T; Oakley S
    Int J Audiol; 2009 May; 48(5):271-6. PubMed ID: 19842802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparison of Beyer DT48 and etymotic insert earphones: auditory brain stem response measurements.
    Beauchaine KA; Kaminski JR; Gorga MP
    Ear Hear; 1987 Oct; 8(5):292-7. PubMed ID: 3678644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The equivalent threshold sound pressure levels and test-retest threshold variability of a consumer-grade insert earphone fitted with stock, foam, and otoacoustic emission probe ear tips.
    Seluakumaran K; Kamal Azizi A; Kulasegarah J
    Int J Audiol; 2024 Jul; 63(7):551-559. PubMed ID: 37139683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Reference threshold levels for an ER-3A insert earphone.
    Frank T; Vavrek MJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1992 Jan; 3(1):51-9. PubMed ID: 1571587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of earphone and sound field methods for estimating noise attenuation of foam earplugs.
    Carter NL; Upfold G
    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1993 Jun; 54(6):307-12. PubMed ID: 8328360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Compensated active noise cancellation earphone for audiometric screening tests in noisy environments.
    Chang HY; Luo CH; Lo TS; Tai CC
    Int J Audiol; 2019 Nov; 58(11):747-753. PubMed ID: 31215819
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The effect of conductive hearing loss on the masking-level difference: insert versus standard earphones.
    Hall JW; Grose JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 May; 95(5 Pt 1):2652-7. PubMed ID: 8207138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Sound attenuation of TDH-39 earphones in a diffuse field of narrow-band noise.
    Arlinger SD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1986 Jan; 79(1):189-91. PubMed ID: 3944342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Inter-aural attenuation with insert earphones.
    Munro KJ; Contractor A
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Oct; 49(10):799-801. PubMed ID: 20735285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Equivalent threshold sound pressure levels for Sennheiser HDA 200 earphone and Etymotic Research ER-2 insert earphone in the frequency range 125 Hz to 16 kHz.
    Han LA; Poulsen T
    Scand Audiol; 1998; 27(2):105-12. PubMed ID: 9638829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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