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 *

99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8304681)

  • 21. Evaluation by industrial workers of passive and level-dependent hearing protection devices.
    Tufts JB; Hamilton MA; Ucci AJ; Rubas J
    Noise Health; 2011; 13(50):26-36. PubMed ID: 21173484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Soft tissue conduction as a possible contributor to the limited attenuation provided by hearing protection devices.
    Chordekar S; Adelman C; Sohmer H; Kishon-Rabin L
    Noise Health; 2016; 18(84):274-279. PubMed ID: 27762257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Most comfortable loudness shift as a measure of speech attenuation by hearing protectors.
    Letowski T; Burstein N; Clark J; Romanowski L; Sevec A
    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1995 Apr; 56(4):356-61. PubMed ID: 7726101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Spectral analysis of hearing protector impulsive insertion loss.
    Fackler CJ; Berger EH; Murphy WJ; Stergar ME
    Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup1):13-21. PubMed ID: 27885881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Hearing protection devices: Use at work predicts use at play.
    Beach EF; Gilliver M; Williams W
    Arch Environ Occup Health; 2016 Sep; 71(5):281-288. PubMed ID: 26927729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The binaural masking-level difference of mandarin tone detection and the binaural intelligibility-level difference of mandarin tone recognition in the presence of speech-spectrum noise.
    Ho CY; Li PC; Chiang YC; Young ST; Chu WC
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(3):e0120977. PubMed ID: 25835987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Observations on the correlation of subjective and objective attenuation measurements on earplugs.
    Liu Y; Wells L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Feb; 147(2):941. PubMed ID: 32113303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. A deep neural-network classifier for photograph-based estimation of hearing protection attenuation and fit.
    Smalt CJ; Ciccarelli GA; Rodriguez AR; Murphy WJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Aug; 150(2):1067. PubMed ID: 34470332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Variations in voice level and fundamental frequency with changing background noise level and talker-to-listener distance while wearing hearing protectors: A pilot study.
    Bouserhal RE; Macdonald EN; Falk TH; Voix J
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 1():S13-20. PubMed ID: 26765993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Verification of Attenuation for Premolded Hearing Protection Devices Designed for Music.
    Zaccardi TA; Portnuff CD; Le Prell CG
    Med Probl Perform Art; 2022 Jun; 37(2):78-88. PubMed ID: 35637560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. To measure the impact of hearing protectors on the perception of speech in noise.
    Hiselius P; Edvall N; Reimers D
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Feb; 54 Suppl 1():S3-8. PubMed ID: 25549165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Hearing loss and use of hearing protection among career firefighters in the United States.
    Hong O; Chin DL; Samo DG
    J Occup Environ Med; 2013 Aug; 55(8):960-5. PubMed ID: 23887702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Effects of background noise on earphone thresholds.
    Frank T; Williams DL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1993 May; 4(3):201-12. PubMed ID: 8318711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Field attenuation characteristics of hearing protectors and differences in estimating their attenuation with different methods.
    Gong W; Xu Y; Liu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2022 Jun; 151(6):3979. PubMed ID: 35778180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The effects of training format on earplug performance.
    Joseph A; Punch J; Stephenson M; Paneth N; Wolfe E; Murphy W
    Int J Audiol; 2007 Oct; 46(10):609-18. PubMed ID: 17922350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Development of an auditory situation awareness test battery for advanced hearing protectors and TCAPS: detection subtest of DRILCOM (detection-recognition/identification-localization-communication).
    Lee K; Casali JG
    Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup1):22-33. PubMed ID: 27905220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effects of hearing protector devices on speech intelligibility: the importance of individualized assessment.
    Rocha CH; Lisboa G; Padilha FYOMM; Rabelo CM; Samelli AG
    Int J Occup Saf Ergon; 2022 Jun; 28(2):1227-1234. PubMed ID: 33502290
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.