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 *

83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7176569)

  • 1. "The effect of response method on the difficulty of speech discrimination tests, a response to Wilson and Antablin, JSHD 1980".
    Dillon H
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1982 Feb; 47(1):110-2. PubMed ID: 7176569
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [The Freiburg monosyllabic test put to the test].
    Baljić I; Hoppe U
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):538-9. PubMed ID: 27455987
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Development of the ORCA nonsense syllable test.
    Kuk F; Lau CC; Korhonen P; Crose B; Peeters H; Keenan D
    Ear Hear; 2010 Dec; 31(6):779-95. PubMed ID: 20622673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Relationship between two nontraditional procedures for assessing speech-sound discrimination.
    Bountress NG; Sever JC; Williams JT
    Percept Mot Skills; 1989 Oct; 69(2):499-503. PubMed ID: 2812996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Test-retest reliability of the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test].
    Winkler A; Holube I
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):564-71. PubMed ID: 27286728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Phonemic balance of the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test].
    Exter M; Winkler A; Holube I
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):557-63. PubMed ID: 27299891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Examination of a training effect in the Freiburg monosyllabic test].
    Schmidt T; Baljić I
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):584-8. PubMed ID: 27435273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Implementation of the speech comprehension test for complex syntactic structures (after D.V. Bishop) in 6- and 8-year-old primary school children].
    Feldhusen F; Brunner M; Heinrich C; Pröschel U
    HNO; 2007 Sep; 55(9):729-36. PubMed ID: 17415540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effect of test difficulty on the sensitivity of speech discrimination tests.
    Dillon H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Jan; 73(1):336-44. PubMed ID: 6826903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [The adaptive Freiburg monosyllabic test in noise : Development of a procedure and comparison of the results with the Oldenburg sentence test].
    Memmeler T; Schönweiler R; Wollenberg B; Löhler J
    HNO; 2019 Feb; 67(2):118-125. PubMed ID: 30519714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Rasch analysis of word identification and magnitude estimation scaling responses in measuring naive listeners' judgments of speech intelligibility of children with severe-to-profound hearing impairments.
    Beltyukova SA; Stone GM; Ellis LW
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 51(5):1124-37. PubMed ID: 18664707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [The Freiburg speech intelligibility test : A pillar of speech audiometry in German-speaking countries].
    Hoth S
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):540-8. PubMed ID: 27259640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Verification of normative values for the Swiss version of the Freiburg speech intelligibility test].
    Kompis M; Krebs M; Häusler R
    HNO; 2006 Jun; 54(6):445-50. PubMed ID: 16189713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Characteristics, advantages, and limits of matrix tests].
    Brand T; Wagener KC
    HNO; 2017 Mar; 65(3):182-188. PubMed ID: 27538937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Theoretical considerations in testing speech perception through electroauditory stimulation.
    Pickett JM
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1983; 405():424-34. PubMed ID: 6223555
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Evaluation of the perceptual equivalence of test lists in the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test].
    Baljić I; Winkler A; Schmidt T; Holube I
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):572-83. PubMed ID: 27418349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Normative data for the Words-in-Noise Test for 6- to 12-year-old children.
    Wilson RH; Farmer NM; Gandhi A; Shelburne E; Weaver J
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2010 Oct; 53(5):1111-21. PubMed ID: 20699343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech discrimination in preschool children: a comparison of two tasks.
    Menary S; Trehub SE; McNutt J
    J Speech Hear Res; 1982 Jun; 25(2):202-7. PubMed ID: 7120959
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Five-choice speech discrimination test].
    Takeuchi Y
    Nihon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho; 1990 Nov; 93(11):1856-63. PubMed ID: 2280307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Speech intelligibility as a predictor of cochlear implant outcome in prelingually deafened adults.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Beers M; Boermans PP; Briaire JJ; Frijns JH
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):445-58. PubMed ID: 21258238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.