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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7498188)

  • 1. Audibility of reverse alarms under hearing protectors for normal and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Robinson GS; Casali JG
    Ergonomics; 1995 Nov; 38(11):2281-99. PubMed ID: 7498188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The challenge of localizing vehicle backup alarms: effects of passive and electronic hearing protectors, ambient noise level, and backup alarm spectral content.
    Alali KA; Casali JG
    Noise Health; 2011; 13(51):99-112. PubMed ID: 21368435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of hearing protection on narrowband signal detection in industrial noise.
    Abel SM; Kunov H; Pichora-Fuller MK; Alberti PW
    J Otolaryngol; 1983 Apr; 12(2):83-8. PubMed ID: 6864854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Auditory backup alarms: distance-at-first-detection via in-situ experimentation on alarm design and hearing protection effects.
    Alali K; Casali JG
    Work; 2012; 41 Suppl 1():3599-607. PubMed ID: 22317269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of Hearing and Head Protection on the Localization of Tonal and Broadband Reverse Alarms.
    Laroche C; Giguère C; Vaillancourt V; Marleau C; Cadieux MF; Laprise-Girard K; Gula E; Carroll V; Bibeau M; Nélisse H
    Hum Factors; 2022 Nov; 64(7):1105-1120. PubMed ID: 33596712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Speech intelligibility in noise with ear protectors.
    Abel SM; Alberti PW; Riko K
    J Otolaryngol; 1980 Jun; 9(3):256-65. PubMed ID: 7001041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Symphony orchestra musicians' use of hearing protection and attenuation of custom-made hearing protectors as measured with two different real-ear attenuation at threshold methods.
    Huttunen KH; Sivonen VP; Poykko VT
    Noise Health; 2011; 13(51):176-88. PubMed ID: 21368443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Amplified earmuffs: impact on speech intelligibility in industrial noise for listeners with hearing loss.
    Dolan TG; O'Loughlin D
    Am J Audiol; 2005 Jun; 14(1):80-5. PubMed ID: 16180971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hearing in nonprofessional pop/rock musicians.
    Schmuziger N; Patscheke J; Probst R
    Ear Hear; 2006 Aug; 27(4):321-30. PubMed ID: 16825883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Attenuation of hearing protectors at 85 dB SPL investigated by commercial "insertion gain" method.
    Woxen O; Borchgrevink HM
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1991; 34():145-55. PubMed ID: 1842461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Smoke alarms for sleeping adults who are hard-of-hearing: comparison of auditory, visual, and tactile signals.
    Bruck D; Thomas IR
    Ear Hear; 2009 Feb; 30(1):73-80. PubMed ID: 19125029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Relative ear protector performance in high vs low sound levels.
    Thunder TD; Lankford JE
    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1979 Dec; 40(12):1023-9. PubMed ID: 539542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Augmented warning sound detection for hearing protectors.
    Bernstein ER; Brammer AJ; Yu G
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL29-34. PubMed ID: 24437853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Sound attenuation from earmuffs and earplugs in combination: maximum benefits vs. missed information.
    Abel SM; Odell P
    Aviat Space Environ Med; 2006 Sep; 77(9):899-904. PubMed ID: 16964737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Signal detection and speech perception with level-dependent hearing protectors.
    Abel SM; Krever EM; Giguere C; Alberti PW
    J Otolaryngol; 1991 Feb; 20(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 2030537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of electronic ANR and conventional hearing protectors on vehicle backup alarm detection in noise.
    Casali JG; Robinson GS; Dabney EC; Gauger D
    Hum Factors; 2004; 46(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 15151152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Timbre discrimination in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners under different noise conditions.
    Emiroglu S; Kollmeier B
    Brain Res; 2008 Jul; 1220():199-207. PubMed ID: 17991457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of speech presentation level on acceptance of noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Freyaldenhoven MC; Plyler PN; Thelin JW; Hedrick MS
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Aug; 50(4):878-85. PubMed ID: 17675593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.