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 *

331 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11093610)

  • 21. [Hearing aids: objective and subjective evaluations of linear and nonlinear amplification users].
    Costa LP; Iório MC
    Pro Fono; 2006; 18(1):21-30. PubMed ID: 16625868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Amplification with digital noise reduction and the perception of annoying and aversive sounds.
    Palmer CV; Bentler R; Mueller HG
    Trends Amplif; 2006 Jun; 10(2):95-104. PubMed ID: 16959733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effects of expansion on the objective and subjective performance of hearing instrument users.
    Plyler PN; Hill AB; Trine TD
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2005 Feb; 16(2):101-13. PubMed ID: 15807049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effect of Hearing Aid Directionality and Remote Microphone on Speech Intelligibility in Complex Listening Situations.
    Wagener KC; Vormann M; Latzel M; Mülder HE
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518804945. PubMed ID: 30322342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Using Speech Recall in Hearing Aid Fitting and Outcome Evaluation Under Ecological Test Conditions.
    Lunner T; Rudner M; Rosenbom T; Ågren J; Ng EH
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37 Suppl 1():145S-54S. PubMed ID: 27355764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Speech recognition ability in noise and its relationship to perceived hearing aid benefit.
    Cord MT; Leek MR; Walden BE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2000 Oct; 11(9):475-83. PubMed ID: 11057731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Adaptive noise suppression for a dual-microphone hearing aid.
    Wouters J; Berghe JV; Maj JB
    Int J Audiol; 2002 Oct; 41(7):401-7. PubMed ID: 12403608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Study of benefit and of acclimatization in recent users of hearing aids].
    Amorim RM; Almeida Kd
    Pro Fono; 2007; 19(1):39-48. PubMed ID: 17461346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance.
    Ricketts T; Lindley G; Henry P
    Ear Hear; 2001 Aug; 22(4):348-61. PubMed ID: 11527041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Preferred listening levels: the effect of background noise for moderate-to-profoundly hearing impaired aid users.
    Dean MR; McDermott HJ
    Scand Audiol; 2000; 29(3):139-49. PubMed ID: 10990012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Development and assessment of two fixed-array microphones for use with hearing aids.
    Bilsen FA; Soede W; Berkhout AJ
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993; 30(1):73-81. PubMed ID: 8263830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Evaluation of combined dynamic compression and single channel noise reduction for hearing aid applications.
    Kortlang S; Chen Z; Gerkmann T; Kollmeier B; Hohmann V; Ewert SD
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S43-S54. PubMed ID: 28355947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Clinical evaluation of a portable digital hearing aid with narrow-band loudness compensation.
    Hidaka H; Kawase T; Takahashi S; Suzuki Y; Ozawa K; Sakamoto S; Sasaki N; Hirano K; Ueda N; Sone T; Takasaka T
    Scand Audiol; 1998; 27(4):225-36. PubMed ID: 9832405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Predicted and measured speech recognition performance in noise with linear amplification.
    Magnusson L; Karlsson M; Leijon A
    Ear Hear; 2001 Feb; 22(1):46-57. PubMed ID: 11271975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Factors influencing individual variation in perceptual directional microphone benefit.
    Keidser G; Dillon H; Convery E; Mejia J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013; 24(10):955-68. PubMed ID: 24384081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Difference in Speech Recognition between a Default and Programmed Telecoil Program.
    Ledda KT; Valente M; Oeding K; Kallogjeri D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 Jun; 30(6):502-515. PubMed ID: 30461405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. IV. Fitting hearing aids with multi-channel compression so as to restore 'normal' loudness for speech at different levels.
    Moore BC
    Br J Audiol; 2000 Jun; 34(3):165-77. PubMed ID: 10905450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comparison of performance with wide dynamic range compression and linear amplification.
    Kam AC; Wong LL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1999 Sep; 10(8):445-57. PubMed ID: 10813645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Directivity and noise reduction in hearing aids: speech perception and benefit.
    Quintino CA; Mondelli MF; Ferrari DV
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2010; 76(5):630-8. PubMed ID: 20963348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.