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 *

80 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 511653)

  • 1. Test-retest variability in testing hearing of speech.
    Hughes EC; Arthur RH; Johnson RL
    J Am Aud Soc; 1979; 5(1):17-20. PubMed ID: 511653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry.
    Hagerman B
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Monaural vs binaural speech reception threshold and word discrimination scores in the hearing impaired.
    Siegenthaler BM; Craig CH
    J Aud Res; 1981 Apr; 21(2):133-5. PubMed ID: 7052803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech recognition threshold in noise: effects of hearing loss, frequency response, and speech materials.
    Van Tasell DJ; Yanz JL
    J Speech Hear Res; 1987 Sep; 30(3):377-86. PubMed ID: 3669644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences.
    Plomp R; Mimpen AM
    Audiology; 1979; 18(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 760724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An evaluation of speech audiometry by bone conduction in hearing-impaired adults.
    Karlsen EA; Goetzinger CP
    J Aud Res; 1980 Apr; 20(2):89-95. PubMed ID: 7345063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Alterations of speech audiometry in presbycusis brought about by cochlear acoustic emissions].
    Bonfils P
    J Otolaryngol; 1988 Aug; 17(5):207-10. PubMed ID: 3216441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Central masking effects on spondee threshold as a function of masker sensation level and masker sound pressure level.
    Martin FN; Digiovanni D
    J Am Audiol Soc; 1979; 4(4):141-6. PubMed ID: 422425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Establishment of age-specific normative data for the canadian French version of the hearing in noise test for children.
    Vaillancourt V; Laroche C; Giguère C; Soli SD
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):453-66. PubMed ID: 18349705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Binaural speech discrimination under noise in hearing-impaired listeners.
    Kumar KV; Rao AB
    Aviat Space Environ Med; 1988 Oct; 59(10):932-6. PubMed ID: 3190620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [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]  

  • 13. Speech-reception threshold in noise for hearing-impaired listeners in conditions with a varying amplitude-frequency response.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Festen JM; Plomp R
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():202-6. PubMed ID: 2356728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Speech reception thresholds using conventional vs high-frequency spondees in normals and in subjects with marked high-frequency sensorineural loss.
    Martin FN; Jansen RM
    J Aud Res; 1985 Apr; 25(2):133-42. PubMed ID: 3842138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reliability in the determination of speech reception threshold (SRT).
    Hagerman B
    Scand Audiol; 1979; 8(4):195-202. PubMed ID: 531473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bone-conducted speech: intelligibility functions and threshold force levels for spondees.
    Beattie RC; Smiarowski RA
    Am J Otol; 1981 Oct; 3(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 7304720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Test-retest repeatability of distortion product otoacoustic emissions.
    Wagner W; Heppelmann G; Vonthein R; Zenner HP
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):378-91. PubMed ID: 18382378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech discrimination scores at low sensation levels as a possible index of malingering.
    Gold S; Lubinsky R; Shahar A
    J Aud Res; 1981 Apr; 21(2):137-41. PubMed ID: 7052804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response.
    Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR
    Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17804982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Auditory localization and speech perception in noise. Preliminary study concerning 5 cases of perceptual deafness].
    Canévet G; Santon F; Scharf B
    Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac; 1986; 103(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 3706968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.