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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7162160)

  • 1. Thresholds and psychometric functions of the individual spondaic words.
    Young LL; Dudley B; Gunter MB
    J Speech Hear Res; 1982 Dec; 25(4):586-93. PubMed ID: 7162160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Spondee recognition threshold as a function of set size.
    Punch JL; Howard MT
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1985 May; 50(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 3990257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Psychometric equivalence of recorded spondaic words as test items.
    Bilger RC; Matthies ML; Meyer TA; Griffiths SK
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1998 Jun; 41(3):516-26. PubMed ID: 9638918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Psychometrically equivalent spondaic words spoken by a female speaker.
    Wilson RH; Strouse A
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1999 Dec; 42(6):1336-46. PubMed ID: 10599616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Reference sound pressure level for Korean speech audiometry.
    Han H; Lee J; Cho S; Kim J; Lee K; Choi WD
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):59-62. PubMed ID: 21047297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detection and recognition masking-level differences for the individual CID W-1 spondaic words.
    Wilson RH; Hopkins JL; Mance CM; Novak RE
    J Speech Hear Res; 1982 Jun; 25(2):235-42. PubMed ID: 7120964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test.
    Warzybok A; Zokoll M; Wardenga N; Ozimek E; Boboshko M; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():35-43. PubMed ID: 25843088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Psychometrically equivalent trisyllabic words for speech reception threshold testing in Mandarin.
    Nissen SL; Harris RW; Jennings LJ; Eggett DL; Buck H
    Int J Audiol; 2005 Jul; 44(7):391-9. PubMed ID: 16136789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Spondaic word detection and recognition functions for female and male speakers.
    Cambron NK; Wilson RH; Shanks JE
    Ear Hear; 1991 Feb; 12(1):64-70. PubMed ID: 2026291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reliability of threshold, slope, and PB max for monosyllabic words.
    Beattie RC; Raffin MJ
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1985 May; 50(2):166-78. PubMed ID: 3990262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Psychometrically equivalent bisyllabic words for speech recognition threshold testing in Vietnamese.
    Harris RW; McPherson DL; Hanson CM; Eggett DL
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Aug; 56(8):525-537. PubMed ID: 28388853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test.
    Zokoll MA; Fidan D; Türkyılmaz D; Hochmuth S; Ergenç İ; Sennaroğlu G; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():51-61. PubMed ID: 26443486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise.
    Ozimek E; Warzybok A; Kutzner D
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Jun; 49(6):444-54. PubMed ID: 20482292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Pediatric speech intelligibility test: performance-intensity characteristics.
    Jerger S; Jerger J
    Ear Hear; 1982; 3(6):325-34. PubMed ID: 7152156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests.
    Hochmuth S; Kollmeier B; Brand T; Jürgens T
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():62-70. PubMed ID: 26097982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Recognition masking-level differences for 10 CID W-1 spondaic words.
    Wilson RH; Shanks JE; Koebsell KA
    J Speech Hear Res; 1982 Dec; 25(4):624-8. PubMed ID: 7162166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Time-compressed spondaic words as a measure of speech reception threshold.
    Foltner KA; Beasley DS; White SC
    J Aud Res; 1979 Oct; 19(4):255-8. PubMed ID: 262461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.