Talk:Pure-tone audiometry

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Pure-tone audiometry.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Hearing impairment#Quantification of hearing loss|degree of hearing loss]] The anchor (#Quantification of hearing loss) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled

Article created by PTApete&co on User:PTApete&co/Pure tone audiometry and then moved here to allow it to go live. SilkTork 18:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Text and/or other creative content from User:PTApete&co/Pure tone audiometry was copied or moved into Pure tone audiometry on 2 March 2007. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Off-Topic?

I'm of the opinion that much of the discussion of the mechanism of hearing on this page is off-topic, and shoulod probably go into the general hearing page. Should possibly be replaced by a discussion of the variants of PTA (play adiometry, VRA, BOA) instead? I'm probably going to go ahead with this unless there are some big arguments against it, feel free to let me know if you think it hsould go back the way it was. Forsakendaemon (talk) 00:29, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Everything from section Cochlea on down belongs variously in Hearing, Cochlea, Auditory system, Sensorineural hearing loss, or Psychoacoustics articles. The dead region stuff is illustrated by tympanograms, so maybe that stuff goes under tympanometry. It explicitly states that PTA does not detect dead regions, so doesn't belong here. In deficiencies, no representative audiograms resulting from PTA are shown. A large section on interpretation of PTA audiograms in terms of hearing loss (extent - mild, moderate, severe, profound, and type - conductive, sensorineural, central processing, etc) should accompany those.Sbalfour (talk) 19:55, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pure tone audiometry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120323233119/http://www.thebsa.org.uk:80/docs/RecPro/PTA.pdf to http://www.thebsa.org.uk/docs/RecPro/PTA.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]