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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9193042)

  • 1. Comparison between subjective and objective measures of active hearing protector and communication headset attenuation.
    Zera J; Brammer AJ; Pan GJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 Jun; 101(6):3486-97. PubMed ID: 9193042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Understanding speech when wearing communication headsets and hearing protectors with subband processing.
    Brammer AJ; Yu G; Bernstein ER; Cherniack MG; Peterson DR; Tufts JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):671-81. PubMed ID: 25096102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A psychophysical evaluation of the dependence of hearing protector attenuation on noise level.
    Humes LE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Jan; 73(1):297-311. PubMed ID: 6826899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech recognition in noise with active and passive hearing protectors: a comparative study.
    Bockstael A; De Coensel B; Botteldooren D; D'Haenens W; Keppler H; Maes L; Philips B; Swinnen F; Bart V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3702-15. PubMed ID: 21682395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Active noise reduction audiometry: a prospective analysis of a new approach to noise management in audiometric testing.
    Bromwich MA; Parsa V; Lanthier N; Yoo J; Parnes LS
    Laryngoscope; 2008 Jan; 118(1):104-9. PubMed ID: 18043495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimation of the field attenuation of hearing protection devices: sample size necessary to provide acceptable reproducibility.
    Murphy WJ; Franks JR; Berger EH; Behar A; Casali JG; Dixon-Ernst C; Krieg EF; Mozo BT; Royster JD; Royster LH; Simon SD; Stephenson C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Jan; 115(1):311-23. PubMed ID: 14759024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Isolating the auditory system from acoustic noise during functional magnetic resonance imaging: examination of noise conduction through the ear canal, head, and body.
    Ravicz ME; Melcher JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Jan; 109(1):216-31. PubMed ID: 11206150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Influence of physiological noise and the occlusion effect on the measurement of real-ear attenuation at threshold.
    Berger EH; Kerivan JE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Jul; 74(1):81-94. PubMed ID: 6886201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Systematic Evaluation of the Relationship between Physical and Psychoacoustical Measurements of Hearing Protectors' Attenuation.
    Nélisse H; Le Cocq C; Boutin J; Laville F; Voix J
    J Occup Environ Hyg; 2015; 12(12):829-44. PubMed ID: 26023884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of active noise reduction on noise levels at the tympanic membrane.
    Wagstaff AS; Woxen OJ; Andersen HT
    Aviat Space Environ Med; 1998 Jun; 69(6):539-44. PubMed ID: 9641398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Hybrid feedforward-feedback active noise reduction for hearing protection and communication.
    Ray LR; Solbeck JA; Streeter AD; Collier RD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Oct; 120(4):2026-36. PubMed ID: 17069300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Speech intelligibility and protective effectiveness of selected active noise reduction and conventional communications headsets.
    Gower DW; Casali JG
    Hum Factors; 1994 Jun; 36(2):350-67. PubMed ID: 8070798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Attenuation of high-level impulses by earmuffs.
    Zera J; Mlynski R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Oct; 122(4):2082-96. PubMed ID: 17902846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Development and validation of a field microphone-in-real-ear approach for measuring hearing protector attenuation.
    Berger EH; Voix J; Kieper RW; Le Cocq C
    Noise Health; 2011; 13(51):163-75. PubMed ID: 21368442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. [Study on effects of combined hearing protector on communication quality and noise protection].
    Li D; Zheng S; He Y
    Space Med Med Eng (Beijing); 1997 Oct; 10(5):373-5. PubMed ID: 11540394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Hearing protection: surpassing the limits to attenuation imposed by the bone-conduction pathways.
    Berger EH; Kieper RW; Gauger D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Oct; 114(4 Pt 1):1955-67. PubMed ID: 14587596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Asymmetry of masking between noise and iterated rippled noise: evidence for time-interval processing in the auditory system.
    Krumbholz K; Patterson RD; Nobbe A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Oct; 110(4):2096-107. PubMed ID: 11681387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.