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 *

267 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6645468)

  • 21. An analysis of psychophysical tuning curves in normal and pathological ears.
    Carney AE; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Jan; 73(1):268-78. PubMed ID: 6826895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The role of sequential stream segregation and frequency selectivity in the perception of simultaneous sentences by listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Mackersie CL; Prida TL; Stiles D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2001 Feb; 44(1):19-28. PubMed ID: 11218102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. [Göttingen sentence in noise for different audiogram classes].
    Thiele C; Sukowksi H; Lenarz T; Lesinski-Schiedat A
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2012 Dec; 91(12):782-8. PubMed ID: 22234848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Suprathreshold auditory processing deficits in noise: Effects of hearing loss and age.
    Kortlang S; Mauermann M; Ewert SD
    Hear Res; 2016 Jan; 331():27-40. PubMed ID: 26471199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Temporal integration, frequency resolution, and off-frequency listening in normal-hearing and cochlear-impaired listeners.
    Hall JW; Fernandes MA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Oct; 74(4):1172-7. PubMed ID: 6643838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Low-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Brainstem response, speech and high-frequency audiometry.
    Laukli E; Mair IW
    Scand Audiol; 1985; 14(3):133-9. PubMed ID: 4059851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Frequency selectivity and speech intelligibility in noise.
    Lyregaard PE
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1982; 15():113-22. PubMed ID: 6955919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The effects of hearing loss and noise masking on the masking release for speech in temporally complex backgrounds.
    Bacon SP; Opie JM; Montoya DY
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1998 Jun; 41(3):549-63. PubMed ID: 9638921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Masking and partial masking in listeners with a high-frequency hearing loss.
    Smits JT; Duifhuis H
    Audiology; 1982; 21(4):310-24. PubMed ID: 7103838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Auditory filter nonlinearity in mild/moderate hearing impairment.
    Baker RJ; Rosen S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Mar; 111(3):1330-9. PubMed ID: 11931310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. High-level psychophysical tuning curves: simultaneous masking by pure tones and 100-Hz-wide noise bands.
    Nelson DA; Fortune TW
    J Speech Hear Res; 1991 Apr; 34(2):360-73. PubMed ID: 2046360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A new procedure for measuring peripheral compression in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Nelson DA; Schroder AC; Wojtczak M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Oct; 110(4):2045-64. PubMed ID: 11681384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The 500 Hz masking-level difference and word recognition in multitalker babble for 40- to 89-year-old listeners with symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss.
    Wilson RH; Weakley DG
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2005 Jun; 16(6):367-82. PubMed ID: 16178408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Use of the articulation index for assessing residual auditory function in listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment.
    Pavlovic CV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 Apr; 75(4):1253-8. PubMed ID: 6725776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid.
    Plomp R; Duquesnoy AJ
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1982; 15():95-111. PubMed ID: 6955931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Further interpretation of the threshold of octave masking (TOM) test.
    Olsen CC; Berry GA
    Scand Audiol; 1979; 8(4):217-33. PubMed ID: 531475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [From the expert office: The medio-cochlear hearing loss in the noise worker].
    Brusis T
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2011 Mar; 90(3):166-7. PubMed ID: 21380961
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The Words-in-Noise Test (WIN), list 3: a practice list.
    Wilson RH; Watts KL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 Feb; 23(2):92-6. PubMed ID: 22353677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing.
    Festen JM; Plomp R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Oct; 88(4):1725-36. PubMed ID: 2262629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.