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 *

99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12353608)

  • 1. Comparison of an 'intuitive' NHS hearing aid prescription method with DSL 4.1 targets for amplification.
    Parsons JO; Clark CR
    Int J Audiol; 2002 Sep; 41(6):357-62. PubMed ID: 12353608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility.
    Ching TY; Quar TK; Johnson EE; Newall P; Sharma M
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):260-74. PubMed ID: 25751694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Effects of Manufacturer's Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss.
    Quar TK; Umat C; Chew YY
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 May; 30(5):346-356. PubMed ID: 30461383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of predicted ear canal speech levels using the VIOLA input/output-based fitting strategy.
    Cox RM; Flamme GA
    Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):139-48. PubMed ID: 9562536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of Hearing Aid Manufacturers' Software-Derived Fittings to DSL v5.0 Pediatric Targets.
    Folkeard P; Bagatto M; Scollie S
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 May; 31(5):354-362. PubMed ID: 31639078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is normal or less than normal overall loudness preferred by first-time hearing aid users?
    Smeds K
    Ear Hear; 2004 Apr; 25(2):159-72. PubMed ID: 15064661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids.
    Stelmachowicz PG; Dalzell S; Peterson D; Kopun J; Lewis DL; Hoover BE
    Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 9562535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of electroacoustic test signals I: comparison with amplified speech.
    Scollie SD; Seewald RC
    Ear Hear; 2002 Oct; 23(5):477-87. PubMed ID: 12411780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hearing aids in children: the importance of the verification and validation processes.
    Rissatto MR; Novaes BC
    Pro Fono; 2009; 21(2):131-6. PubMed ID: 19629323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of Different Hearing Aid Prescriptions for Children.
    Marriage JE; Vickers DA; Baer T; Glasberg BR; Moore BCJ
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(1):20-31. PubMed ID: 28691934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Desired Sensation Level multistage input/output algorithm.
    Scollie S; Seewald R; Cornelisse L; Moodie S; Bagatto M; Laurnagaray D; Beaulac S; Pumford J
    Trends Amplif; 2005; 9(4):159-97. PubMed ID: 16424945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. A comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptive methods for paediatric hearing-aid fitting: predicted speech intelligibility and loudness.
    Ching TY; Johnson EE; Hou S; Dillon H; Zhang V; Burns L; van Buynder P; Wong A; Flynn C
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Dec; 52 Suppl 2(0 2):S29-38. PubMed ID: 24350692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Fit to targets, preferred listening levels, and self-reported outcomes for the DSL v5.0 a hearing aid prescription for adults.
    Polonenko MJ; Scollie SD; Moodie S; Seewald RC; Laurnagaray D; Shantz J; Richards A
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Aug; 49(8):550-60. PubMed ID: 20438300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of linear gain and wide dynamic range compression hearing aid circuits: aided speech perception measures.
    Jenstad LM; Seewald RC; Cornelisse LE; Shantz J
    Ear Hear; 1999 Apr; 20(2):117-26. PubMed ID: 10229513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Noise analysis of real-life listening situations for maximal speech audibility in hearing aid fitting.
    Köbler S; Leijon A
    Scand Audiol; 1999; 28(3):179-89. PubMed ID: 10489867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fit-to-Targets and Aided Speech Intelligibility Index Values for Hearing Aids Fitted to the DSL v5-Adult Prescription.
    Dao A; Folkeard P; Baker S; Pumford J; Scollie S
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 Feb; 32(2):90-98. PubMed ID: 33296929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Personality, hearing problems, and amplification characteristics: contributions to self-report hearing aid outcomes.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Gray GA
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):141-62. PubMed ID: 17496667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fitting hearing aids to individual loudness-perception measures.
    Ricketts TA
    Ear Hear; 1996 Apr; 17(2):124-32. PubMed ID: 8698159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Use of a loudness model for hearing-aid fitting. I. Linear hearing aids.
    Moore BC; Glasberg BR
    Br J Audiol; 1998 Oct; 32(5):317-35. PubMed ID: 9845030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.