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 *

95 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10209776)

  • 1. Non-linear signal processing in digital hearing aids.
    Lunner T; Hellgren J; Arlinger S; Elberling C
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1998; 49():40-9. PubMed ID: 10209776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A digital filterbank hearing aid: three digital signal processing algorithms--user preference and performance.
    Lunner T; Hellgren J; Arlinger S; Elberling C
    Ear Hear; 1997 Oct; 18(5):373-87. PubMed ID: 9360861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A digital filterbank hearing aid: predicting user preference and performance for two signal processing algorithms.
    Lunner T; Hellgren J; Arlinger S; Elberling C
    Ear Hear; 1997 Feb; 18(1):12-25. PubMed ID: 9058034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of different forms of compression using wearable digital hearing aids.
    Stone MA; Moore BC; Alcántara JI; Glasberg BR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Dec; 106(6):3603-19. PubMed ID: 10615700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of noise, nonlinear processing, and linear filtering on perceived speech quality.
    Arehart KH; Kates JM; Anderson MC
    Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):420-36. PubMed ID: 20440116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Real-time multiband dynamic compression and noise reduction for binaural hearing aids.
    Kollmeier B; Peissig J; Hohmann V
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993; 30(1):82-94. PubMed ID: 8263832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A digital filterbank hearing aid. Improving a prescriptive fitting with subjective adjustments.
    Lunner T; Hellgren J; Arlinger S; Elberling C
    Scand Audiol; 1997; 26(3):169-76. PubMed ID: 9309812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using genetic algorithms with subjective input from human subjects: implications for fitting hearing aids and cochlear implants.
    Başkent D; Eiler CL; Edwards B
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):370-80. PubMed ID: 17485986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T; Wagener KC; Latzel M
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Tolerable hearing aid delays. I. Estimation of limits imposed by the auditory path alone using simulated hearing losses.
    Stone MA; Moore BC
    Ear Hear; 1999 Jun; 20(3):182-92. PubMed ID: 10386846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effective compression and noise reduction configurations for hearing protectors.
    Chung K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Feb; 121(2):1090-101. PubMed ID: 17348531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison between the first-fit settings of two multichannel digital signal-processing strategies: music quality ratings and speech-in-noise scores.
    Higgins P; Searchfield G; Coad G
    Am J Audiol; 2012 Jun; 21(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 22361320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Tolerable delay for speech production and perception: effects of hearing ability and experience with hearing aids.
    Goehring T; Chapman JL; Bleeck S; Monaghan JJM
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jan; 57(1):61-68. PubMed ID: 28838277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. One year follow-up of users of a digital hearing aid.
    Arlinger S; Billermark E
    Br J Audiol; 1999 Aug; 33(4):223-32. PubMed ID: 10509857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Is complex signal processing for bone conduction hearing aids useful?
    Kompis M; Kurz A; Pfiffner F; Senn P; Arnold A; Caversaccio M
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 May; 15 Suppl 1():S47-50. PubMed ID: 24869443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical evaluation of a full-digital in-the-ear hearing instrument.
    Boymans M; Dreschler WA; Schoneveld P; Verschuure H
    Audiology; 1999; 38(2):99-108. PubMed ID: 10206519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of single-channel phonemic compression schemes on the understanding of speech by hearing-impaired listeners.
    Goedegebure A; Hulshof M; Maas RJ; Dreschler WA; Verschuure H
    Audiology; 2001; 40(1):10-25. PubMed ID: 11296937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech discrimination with an 8-channel compression hearing aid and conventional aids in background of speech-band noise.
    Yund EW; Simon HJ; Efron R
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1987; 24(4):161-80. PubMed ID: 3430375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Auditory Distraction and Acclimatization to Hearing Aids.
    Dawes P; Munro KJ
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):174-183. PubMed ID: 27564230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality.
    Boymans M; Dreschler WA
    Audiology; 2000; 39(5):260-8. PubMed ID: 11093610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.