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 *

66 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 13582368)

  • 21. Individual consistency of hearing for speech across diverse listening conditions.
    Carhart R; Tillman TW
    J Speech Hear Res; 1972 Mar; 15(1):105-13. PubMed ID: 5012794
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Binaural intelligibility prediction based on the speech transmission index.
    van Wijngaarden SJ; Drullman R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jun; 123(6):4514-23. PubMed ID: 18537400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respect to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort.
    Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 22874643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Noise reduction in binaural hearing aids: analyzing the benefit over monaural systems.
    Srinivasan S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Dec; 124(6):EL353-9. PubMed ID: 19206693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. MONAURAL VERSUS BINAURAL DISCRIMINATION FOR NORMAL LISTENERS.
    CHAPPELL RG; KAVANAGH JF; ZERLIN S
    J Speech Hear Res; 1963 Sep; 6():263-9. PubMed ID: 14062024
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Development of test procedures for evaluation of binaural hearing aids. A final report.
    Carhart RT; Young L
    Bull Prosthet Res; 1976; ():9-45. PubMed ID: 801123
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Auditory rehabilitation effects on speech lateralization in hearing-impaired listeners.
    Philibert B; Collet L; Vesson JF; Veuillet E
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2003 Jan; 123(2):172-5. PubMed ID: 12701735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. An evaluation of the performance of two binaural beamformers in complex and dynamic multitalker environments.
    Best V; Mejia J; Freeston K; van Hoesel RJ; Dillon H
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(10):727-35. PubMed ID: 26140298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Bilateral cochlear implants in children: Effects of auditory experience and deprivation on auditory perception.
    Litovsky RY; Gordon K
    Hear Res; 2016 Aug; 338():76-87. PubMed ID: 26828740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Binaural auditory outcomes in patients with postlingual profound unilateral hearing loss: 3 years after cochlear implantation.
    Mertens G; Kleine Punte A; De Bodt M; Van de Heyning P
    Audiol Neurootol; 2015; 20 Suppl 1():67-72. PubMed ID: 25997790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Modification of speech discrimination in patients with binaural asymmetrical hearing loss.
    Arkebauer HJ; Mencher GT; McCall C
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1971 May; 36(2):208-12. PubMed ID: 5087658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparisons of thresholds for speech; word and sentence tests; receiver vs field; and monaural vs binaural listening.
    BREAKEY MR; DAVIS H
    Laryngoscope; 1949 Mar; 59(3):236-50. PubMed ID: 18125700
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Auditory processing skills and hearing aid satisfaction in a sample of older adults.
    Givens GD; Arnold T; Hume WG
    Percept Mot Skills; 1998 Jun; 86(3 Pt 1):795-801. PubMed ID: 9656270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies III: Speech Intelligibility of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.
    Völker C; Warzybok A; Ernst SM
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Spectral and binaural loudness summation for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Oetting D; Hohmann V; Appell JE; Kollmeier B; Ewert SD
    Hear Res; 2016 May; 335():179-192. PubMed ID: 27006003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):e52-64. PubMed ID: 23416751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Performance in children with hearing aids or cochlear implants: bilateral stimulation and binaural hearing.
    Ching TY; van Wanrooy E; Hill M; Incerti P
    Int J Audiol; 2006; 45 Suppl 1():S108-12. PubMed ID: 16938782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. EEG activity as an objective measure of cognitive load during effortful listening: A study on pediatric subjects with bilateral, asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss.
    Marsella P; Scorpecci A; Cartocci G; Giannantonio S; Maglione AG; Venuti I; Brizi A; Babiloni F
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Aug; 99():1-7. PubMed ID: 28688548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The Effect of Binaural Beamforming Technology on Speech Intelligibility in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Vroegop JL; Homans NC; Goedegebure A; Dingemanse JG; van Immerzeel T; van der Schroeff MP
    Audiol Neurootol; 2018; 23(1):32-38. PubMed ID: 29936510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Monaural vs binaural speech reception threshold and word discrimination scores in the hearing impaired.
    Siegenthaler BM; Craig CH
    J Aud Res; 1981 Apr; 21(2):133-5. PubMed ID: 7052803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.