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 *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12677108)

  • 1. An abbreviated word recognition protocol based on item difficulty.
    Hurley RM; Sells JP
    Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):111-8. PubMed ID: 12677108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
    Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A Comparison of Word-Recognition Performances on the Auditec and VA Recorded Versions of Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 by Young Listeners with Normal Hearing and by Older Listeners with Sensorineural Hearing Loss Using a Randomized Presentation-Level Paradigm.
    Wilson RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 May; 30(5):370-395. PubMed ID: 30969910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A study of recorded versus live voice word recognition.
    Mendel LL; Owen SR
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Oct; 50(10):688-93. PubMed ID: 21812631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Speech and language development in a population of Swedish hearing-impaired pre-school children, a cross-sectional study.
    Borg E; Edquist G; Reinholdson AC; Risberg A; McAllister B
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2007 Jul; 71(7):1061-77. PubMed ID: 17512613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The development of Cantonese Lexical Neighborhood Test: a pilot study.
    Yuen KC; Ng IH; Luk BP; Chan SK; Chan SC; Kwok IC; Yu HC; Chan TM; Hung TC; Tong MC
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2008 Jul; 72(7):1121-9. PubMed ID: 18485493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Lexical and talker effects on word recognition among native and non-native listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Takayanagi S; Dirks DD; Moshfegh A
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Jun; 45(3):585-97. PubMed ID: 12069010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of room acoustics and sound-field amplification on word recognition performance in young adult listeners in suboptimal listening conditions.
    Larsen JB; Vega A; Ribera JE
    Am J Audiol; 2008 Jun; 17(1):50-9. PubMed ID: 18519579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss.
    Amos NE; Humes LE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Aug; 50(4):819-34. PubMed ID: 17675588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. BKB-SIN and ANL predict perceived communication ability in cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Chisolm TH; Blasco GP; Shinnick LJ; Ketter KJ; Krause JC
    Ear Hear; 2009 Aug; 30(4):401-10. PubMed ID: 19390441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and its relationship to aided reported handicap and hearing aid satisfaction.
    Saunders GH; Forsline A
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):229-42. PubMed ID: 16672792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The homogeneity with respect to intelligibility of recorded word-recognition materials.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Apr; 26(4):331-45. PubMed ID: 25879238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of training on speech recognition performance in noise using lexically hard words.
    Burk MH; Humes LE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Feb; 50(1):25-40. PubMed ID: 17344546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of speech discrimination scores by using PB-50 lists and the speech discrimination scale with hearing-impaired adults.
    Beykirch HL; Gaeth JH
    J Aud Res; 1978 Jul; 18(3):153-64. PubMed ID: 755810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of half- vs full-list speech discrimination scores in a hearing-impaired geriatric population.
    Penrod JP
    J Aud Res; 1980 Jul; 20(3):181-6. PubMed ID: 7347739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Children's speech recognition scores: the Speech Intelligibility Index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level.
    Scollie SD
    Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):543-56. PubMed ID: 18469717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The benefit obtained from visually displayed text from an automatic speech recognizer during listening to speech presented in noise.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):838-52. PubMed ID: 18633325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Recognition of digits in different types of noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Smits C; Houtgast T
    Int J Audiol; 2007 Mar; 46(3):134-44. PubMed ID: 17365067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The influence of the detection paradigm in recording auditory steady-state responses.
    Luts H; Van Dun B; Alaerts J; Wouters J
    Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):638-50. PubMed ID: 18469712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Ten-year follow-up of a consecutive series of children with multichannel cochlear implants.
    Uziel AS; Sillon M; Vieu A; Artieres F; Piron JP; Daures JP; Mondain M
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):615-28. PubMed ID: 17667770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.