David C Byrne

Summary

Affiliation: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Country: USA

Publications

  1. ncbi Analysis of nonstandard noise dosimeter microphone positions
    David C Byrne
    Robert A Taft Laboratories, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, USA
    J Occup Environ Hyg 5:197-209. 2008
  2. ncbi Relationship between comfort and attenuation measurements for two types of earplugs
    David C Byrne
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, USA
    Noise Health 13:86-92. 2011
  3. ncbi Effects of training on hearing protector attenuation
    William J Murphy
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226 1998, USA
    Noise Health 13:132-41. 2011
  4. ncbi Two case studies for fit testing hearing protector devices
    William J Murphy
    Hearing Loss Prevention Team, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH
    J Acoust Soc Am 132:2013. 2012
  5. ncbi Working in noise with a hearing loss: perceptions from workers, supervisors, and hearing conservation program managers
    Thais C Morata
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Ear Hear 26:529-45. 2005
  6. ncbi Results of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-U.S. Environmental Protection Agency interlaboratory comparison of American National Standards Institute S12.6-1997 Methods A and B
    William J Murphy
    Hearing Loss Prevention Team, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C 27, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226 1998, USA
    J Acoust Soc Am 125:3262-77. 2009

Detail Information

Publications8

  1. ncbi Analysis of nonstandard noise dosimeter microphone positions
    David C Byrne
    Robert A Taft Laboratories, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, USA
    J Occup Environ Hyg 5:197-209. 2008
    ....
  2. ncbi Relationship between comfort and attenuation measurements for two types of earplugs
    David C Byrne
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, USA
    Noise Health 13:86-92. 2011
    ..The primary research objective was to determine whether hearing protector comfort was related to measured attenuation values. A linear mixed effects model provided evidence for an inverse relationship between comfort and attenuation...
  3. ncbi Effects of training on hearing protector attenuation
    William J Murphy
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH 45226 1998, USA
    Noise Health 13:132-41. 2011
    ..Several comparisons evaluating the order of testing, the type of testing, and statistical tests of the performance across the groups are presented...
  4. ncbi Two case studies for fit testing hearing protector devices
    William J Murphy
    Hearing Loss Prevention Team, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH
    J Acoust Soc Am 132:2013. 2012
    ..The average time to complete the fit tests was 10 minutes. If retraining was necessary, then an additional 3 to 6 minutes were required...
  5. ncbi Working in noise with a hearing loss: perceptions from workers, supervisors, and hearing conservation program managers
    Thais C Morata
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Ear Hear 26:529-45. 2005
    ....
  6. ncbi Results of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-U.S. Environmental Protection Agency interlaboratory comparison of American National Standards Institute S12.6-1997 Methods A and B
    William J Murphy
    Hearing Loss Prevention Team, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C 27, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226 1998, USA
    J Acoust Soc Am 125:3262-77. 2009
    ..These differences resulted in considerably more subjects being required to identify statistically significant differences between laboratories for Method A (12-132 subjects) than for Method B (9-28 subjects)...