ライフサイエンスコーパス: audiometry

1 ore hearing loss is detected by conventional audiometry.

2 esia were also measured via evoked potential audiometry.

3 body-weight) using standard evoked potential audiometry.

4 r speech perception despite normal pure tone audiometry.

5 nometry, and hearing levels were assessed by audiometry.

6 alidated measures of their mental health and audiometry.

7 cochlear implants was measured by pure tone audiometry.

8 .5 to 0.0) compared with those using in situ audiometry.

9 luded ototoxicity measured by air conduction audiometry.

10 rtphone-based vibration, and uHear app-based audiometry.

11 nty patients had both baseline and follow-up audiometry.

12 serial measurement of conventional pure-tone audiometry (0.5 to 8 kHz) and evoked distortion product

13 atients underwent baseline and posttreatment audiometry, 5 of whom developed teprotumumab-related sen

14 measurement of extended high-frequency (EHF) audiometry (9 to 16 kHz).

15 As determined by pure tone audiometry, 973 (33%) participants had normal hearing, 1

16 the calibrated sound challenge by pure tone audiometry; a reduction of 50% in an ebselen dose group

17 Despite normal audiometry, adults living with HIV have lower distortion

18 aring ability was determined using pure-tone audiometry and a web-based hearing test.

19 with an auditory test battery that included audiometry and ABR measures.

20 adults aged 60-81 years underwent pure-tone audiometry and assessments of speech-in-noise ability at

21 Hearing measures were air conduction audiometry and binaural speech perception in noise.

22 Using the NHANES, audiometry and BMD data of 1123 participants aged 70 y w

23 resholds (per 10 dB) assessed with pure tone audiometry and categorized as normal hearing or mild, mo

24 apir positron emission tomography, pure tone audiometry and cognitive testing as part of a neuroscien

25 f the feasibility of extended high-frequency audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic emissions

26 EHF audiometry and DPOAEs have the potential to reveal earli

27 Side-effects were assessed by pure tone audiometry and liver function tests.

28 A negative association between pure tone audiometry and mini-mental state examination score was o

29 No abnormalities in serum creatinine or audiometry and no episodes of significant bronchospasm w

30 Hearing was measured using standard audiometry and reviewed centrally by audiologists masked

31 comparative analysis exists between in situ audiometry and self-adjustment strategies using self-fit

32 Hearing was assessed, in dB, by pure-tone audiometry and summarized as the better hearing ear's pu

33 Road (n = 348) was measured using pure-tone audiometry and summarized using principal component (PC)

34 Speech audiometry and tympanometry identified no differences in

35 ruments, level of reporting (usage, age, and audiometry) and cross validation of usage measures.

36 g, Words-in-Noise [WIN] tests, full-spectrum audiometry, and additional otologic measures), as well a

37 Hearing status was examined using pure-tone audiometry, and pure-tone average (PTA) of hearing thres

38 ic potential tests (cVEMP, oVEMP), pure-tone audiometry, and speech discrimination was applied.

39 oustic emissions and extended high frequency audiometry, and to evaluate a central review mechanism f

40 ions as a tool to screen for objective HL by audiometry, areas under the curve were estimated using a

41 ing sensitivities were assessed by pure-tone audiometry at 19 US sites.

42 threshold levels were obtained by pure-tone audiometry at eight frequencies from 0.25 to 8 kHz.

43 Hearing was measured (pure-tone audiometry) at baseline, 1 year and 3 years of the study

44 ring function data in patients who underwent audiometry before and after ICB treatment.

45 We used a behavioral observation audiometry (BOA) hearing test method in free-ranging hum

46 However, clinical audiometry, by which hearing loss is diagnosed, is limit

47 auditory canal enhancement in four patients. Audiometry commonly revealed severe-profound bilateral s

48 ents through video oculography and pure tone audiometry, conducted by an experienced audiologist in t

49 implemented with conditioned play pure-tone audiometry (CPA) and distortion product otoacoustic emis

50 utcome was incident HI measured by pure-tone audiometry, defined as PTA greater than 25-dB hearing le

51 between the web-based SNR test and pure-tone audiometry determined using bivariate modelling.

52 uditory function than conventional frequency audiometry during platinum chemotherapy in children.

53 ever, remained significantly associated with audiometry, even when mental status was worse.

54 rition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2004 Audiometry Examination Component.

55 ls (20.8%) had normal hearing at the time of audiometry examination; among those with hearing loss, 1

56 tabase, which contains data on all pure-tone audiometry examinations performed at public hearing reha

57 cioscapulohumeral dystrophy, funduscopic and audiometry examinations.

58 ing Lexie B2 hearing aids, while the in situ audiometry group used Lexie B2 Plus hearing aids (Lexie

59 ake -/- mice tested with reflex modification audiometry had reduced sensitivity to an abrupt change i

60 Clinical audiometry has long focused on determining the detection

61 ed thyroid function (hypothyroidism, 10.1%), audiometry (hearing loss, 22.6%), dual-energy x-ray abso

62 ols using pure-tone air- and bone-conduction audiometry in sound-treated booths.

63 f 6166 children aged 6 to 19 years completed audiometry in the mobile examination center of the Third

64 Objective audiometry, in which brain responses evoked by auditory

65 eek of 1946 who underwent baseline pure tone audiometry (mean age=70.6 years) and two time point cogn

66 s in GJB2 was assessed by means of pure-tone audiometry, measurement of middle-ear immittance, and re

67 Audiometry, patulous eustachian tube (PET) testing, and

68 Pure tone audiometry performance did not predict concurrent beta-a

69 nalysis was to investigate whether pure tone audiometry performance predicted a range of cognitive an

70 here was some evidence that poorer pure tone audiometry performance was associated with lower primary

71 rticipants aged 60 to 69 years with complete audiometry, physical activity, and comorbidity data were

72 But pure tone audiometry (PTA) alone fails to fully explain SIN abilit

73 an average threshold on behavioral pure-tone audiometry (PTA) at week 24 of 70 dB HL or less, a clini

74 ive testing remained durably associated with audiometry, regardless of mental health.

75 Of the 17 children with EHF audiometry results, 16 (94.1%) had bilateral ototoxicity

76 Here, we used standard and EHF audiometry, self-report, and successively higher cutoff

77 Pure tone audiometry, speech reception threshold against noise, an

78 Self-adjustment and in situ audiometry strategies produced no clinically meaningful

79 SF hearing aids, self-adjustment and in situ audiometry strategies resulted in similar outcomes.

80 adults between ages 20 and 80 years who had audiometry testing and responded to a hearing questionna

81 We screened nine dRTA kindreds with normal audiometry that linked to the ATP6N1B locus, and identif

82 ies in the United States have used pure-tone audiometry to derive hearing loss prevalence estimates f

83 Hearing tests included pure-tone audiometry, tympanometry, distortion-product otoacoustic

84 erence tomography, axial length measurement, audiometry, visual evoked response (VER), orbital and ce

85 cuity tests, tonometry, retinal photography, audiometry, vital capacity determinations, a health ques

86 ion between subjective Inner EAR results and audiometry was evaluated.

87 Audiometry was performed and revealed moderate to severe

88 Audiometry was performed for 273 participants and showed

89 peech-frequency HL and high-frequency HL) by audiometry were calculated.

90 years with newly diagnosed cancer and normal audiometry were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sodiu

91 Ideally, audiometry with counseling before each cisplatin cycle s

92 are better understood, we recommend baseline audiometry with PET testing and repeat testing if new ot

93 between standard Inner EAR scale scores and audiometry, with a positive association observed only in

94 of the patients was evaluated with pure tone audiometry, with mean values at frequencies of 500, 1000