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 *

217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15191328)

  • 1. Speech perception benefits of FM and infrared devices to children with hearing aids in a typical classroom.
    Anderson KL; Goldstein H
    Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch; 2004 Apr; 35(2):169-84. PubMed ID: 15191328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Speech recognition abilities of adults using cochlear implants with FM systems.
    Schafer EC; Thibodeau LM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2004; 15(10):678-91. PubMed ID: 15646666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Speech Perception in Classroom Acoustics by Children With Hearing Loss and Wearing Hearing Aids.
    Iglehart F
    Am J Audiol; 2020 Mar; 29(1):6-17. PubMed ID: 31835909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech perception by students with cochlear implants using sound-field systems in classrooms.
    Iglehart F
    Am J Audiol; 2004 Jun; 13(1):62-72. PubMed ID: 15248805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of FM system fitted into normal hearing ear on speech-in-noise recognition in Japanese school-aged children with unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss.
    Shimada A; Udaka J; Nagashima H; Chiba I; Kondo E; Nakano S; Okamoto H; Takeda N
    J Med Invest; 2018; 65(3.4):216-220. PubMed ID: 30282863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The influence of audiovisual ceiling performance on the relationship between reverberation and directional benefit: perception and prediction.
    Wu YH; Bentler RA
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(5):604-14. PubMed ID: 22677815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Experiments with classroom FM amplification.
    Boothroyd A; Iglehart F
    Ear Hear; 1998 Jun; 19(3):202-17. PubMed ID: 9657595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of a Remote Microphone System with Tri-Microphone Beamformer.
    Wolfe J; Duke M; Schafer E; Jones C; Rakita L; Battles J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 Jan; 31(1):50-60. PubMed ID: 31429403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Recognition performance for four combinations of FM system and hearing aid microphone signals in adverse listening conditions.
    Pittman AL; Lewis DE; Hoover BM; Stelmachowicz PG
    Ear Hear; 1999 Aug; 20(4):279-89. PubMed ID: 10466564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Benefit of Remote Microphones Using Four Wireless Protocols.
    Rodemerk KS; Galster JA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Sep; 26(8):724-731. PubMed ID: 26333880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Predictability of speech-in-noise performance from real ear measures of directional hearing AIDS.
    Dhar S; Humes LE; Calandruccio L; Barlow NN; Hipskind N
    Ear Hear; 2004 Apr; 25(2):147-58. PubMed ID: 15064660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparisons of speech recognition in noise by mildly-to-moderately hearing-impaired children using hearing aids and FM systems.
    Hawkins DB
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1984 Nov; 49(4):409-18. PubMed ID: 6503247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Speech perception in noise: directional microphones versus frequency modulation (FM) systems.
    Lewis MS; Crandell CC; Valente M; Horn JE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2004 Jun; 15(6):426-39. PubMed ID: 15341224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Combined effects of noise and reverberation on speech recognition performance of normal-hearing children and adults.
    Neuman AC; Wroblewski M; Hajicek J; Rubinstein A
    Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):336-44. PubMed ID: 20215967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A proposed electroacoustic test protocol for personal FM receivers coupled to cochlear implant sound processors.
    Schafer EC; Musgrave E; Momin S; Sandrock C; Romine D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013; 24(10):941-54. PubMed ID: 24384080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Speech recognition for bilaterally asymmetric and symmetric hearing aid microphone modes in simulated classroom environments.
    Ricketts TA; Picou EM
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):601-9. PubMed ID: 23524508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech Perception in Noise and Listening Effort of Older Adults With Nonlinear Frequency Compression Hearing Aids.
    Shehorn J; Marrone N; Muller T
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):215-225. PubMed ID: 28806193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of amplification systems in a classroom.
    Nábĕlek AK; Donahue AM; Letowski TR
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1986 Jan; 23(1):41-52. PubMed ID: 3958997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Distance and reverberation effects on directional benefit.
    Ricketts TA; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2003 Dec; 24(6):472-84. PubMed ID: 14663347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Full time directional versus user selectable microphone modes in hearing aids.
    Ricketts T; Henry P; Gnewikow D
    Ear Hear; 2003 Oct; 24(5):424-39. PubMed ID: 14534412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.