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: 8807265)

  • 21. The French digit triplet test: a hearing screening tool for speech intelligibility in noise.
    Jansen S; Luts H; Wagener KC; Frachet B; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2010 May; 49(5):378-87. PubMed ID: 20380611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Automated Forced-Choice Tests of Speech Recognition.
    Margolis RH; Wilson RH; Saly GL; Gregoire HM; Madsen BM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 Oct; 32(9):606-615. PubMed ID: 35176804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effect of multiple speechlike maskers on binaural speech recognition in normal and impaired hearing.
    Bronkhorst AW; Plomp R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Dec; 92(6):3132-9. PubMed ID: 1474228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies III: Speech Intelligibility of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.
    Völker C; Warzybok A; Ernst SM
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The AMA method of estimation of hearing disability: a validation study.
    Dobie RA
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(6):732-40. PubMed ID: 21694598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Digital speech hearing screening using a quick novel mobile hearing impairment assessment: an observational correlation study.
    Banks R; Greene BR; Morrow I; Ciesla M; Woolever D; Tobyne S; Gomes-Osman J; Jannati A; Showalter J; Bates D; Pascual-Leone A
    Sci Rep; 2024 Sep; 14(1):21157. PubMed ID: 39256446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. School-Age Hearing Screening Based on Speech-in-Noise Perception Using the Digit Triplet Test.
    Denys S; Hofmann M; Luts H; Guérin C; Keymeulen A; Van Hoeck K; van Wieringen A; Hoppenbrouwers K; Wouters J
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(6):1104-1115. PubMed ID: 29557793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Does preoperative hearing predict postoperative hearing in patients undergoing primary aural atresia repair?
    Nicholas BD; Krook KA; Gray LC; Kesser BW
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Aug; 33(6):1002-6. PubMed ID: 22772017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparison of the South African Spondaic and CID W-1 wordlists for measuring speech recognition threshold.
    Hanekom T; Soer M; Pottas L
    S Afr J Commun Disord; 2015 Jun; 62(1):E1-10. PubMed ID: 26304218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Effective identification of functional hearing loss using behavioral threshold measures.
    Schlauch RS; Koerner TK; Marshall L
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 58(2):453-65. PubMed ID: 25421175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Evaluating a smartphone digits-in-noise test as part of the audiometric test battery.
    Potgieter JM; Swanepoel W; Smits C
    S Afr J Commun Disord; 2018 May; 65(1):e1-e6. PubMed ID: 29781704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Pseudohypacusis in children: circumstances and diagnostic strategy.
    Drouillard M; Petroff N; Majer J; Perrot C; Quesnel S; François M;
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2014 Oct; 78(10):1632-6. PubMed ID: 25112166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Reading Behind the Lines: The Factors Affecting the Text Reception Threshold in Hearing Aid Users.
    Zekveld AA; Pronk M; Danielsson H; Rönnberg J
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Mar; 61(3):762-775. PubMed ID: 29450534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Speech-reception threshold in noise for hearing-impaired listeners in conditions with a varying amplitude-frequency response.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Festen JM; Plomp R
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():202-6. PubMed ID: 2356728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Comparison of thresholds acquired with SVR and PTA in normal hearing subjects].
    Liu H; Zhu GY; Yang XP; Zhou XR; Wan L; Fan LH
    Fa Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2010 Feb; 26(1):18-21. PubMed ID: 20232737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Evaluation of a Protocol for Integrated Speech Audiometry.
    Punch J; Rakerd B
    Am J Audiol; 2019 Mar; 28(1):26-36. PubMed ID: 30535271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [Analysis of disyllabic mandarin speech test results of normal hearing persons with different ages].
    Wang Y; Zhang H; Tong J; Guo J; Zheng Z; Wu W; Chen J; Li Y
    Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2012 Apr; 26(7):312-5. PubMed ID: 22737873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Cost effectiveness of various spondee-threshold methods.
    Harris LV; Raffin MJ
    J Aud Res; 1982 Apr; 22(2):143-51. PubMed ID: 6821256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effects of stimulus level on the speech perception abilities of children using cochlear implants or digital hearing aids.
    Davidson LS
    Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):493-507. PubMed ID: 16957500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The digits-in-noise test: assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise.
    Smits C; Theo Goverts S; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1693-706. PubMed ID: 23464039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.