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 *

93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16238181)

  • 1. Learning effect when using the Danish Hagerman sentences (Dantale II) to determine speech reception threshold.
    Hernvig LH; Olsen SO
    Int J Audiol; 2005 Sep; 44(9):509-12. PubMed ID: 16238181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical measurements of speech reception threshold in noise.
    Hagerman B
    Scand Audiol; 1984; 13(1):57-63. PubMed ID: 6719016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the list of numerals in the Danish speech audiometry material. Dantale.
    Olsen SO
    Scand Audiol; 1996; 25(2):103-7. PubMed ID: 8738635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Design, optimization and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise.
    Wagener K; Josvassen JL; Ardenkjaer R
    Int J Audiol; 2003 Jan; 42(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 12564511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Acceptable noise level (ANL) with Danish and non-semantic speech materials in adult hearing-aid users.
    Olsen SØ; Lantz J; Nielsen LH; Brännström KJ
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Sep; 51(9):678-88. PubMed ID: 22731922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T; Wagener KC; Latzel M
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Phonological mismatch makes aided speech recognition in noise cognitively taxing.
    Rudner M; Foo C; Rönnberg J; Lunner T
    Ear Hear; 2007 Dec; 28(6):879-92. PubMed ID: 17982373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reading Behind the Lines: The Factors Affecting the Text Reception Threshold in Hearing Aid Users.
    Zekveld AA; Pronk M; Danielsson H; Rönnberg J
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Mar; 61(3):762-775. PubMed ID: 29450534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment.
    Wardenga N; Batsoulis C; Wagener KC; Brand T; Lenarz T; Maier H
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():71-9. PubMed ID: 26555195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry.
    Hagerman B
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Danish hearing in noise test.
    Nielsen JB; Dau T
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Mar; 50(3):202-8. PubMed ID: 21319937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Efficient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception threshold in quiet and in noise.
    Hagerman B; Kinnefors C
    Scand Audiol; 1995; 24(1):71-7. PubMed ID: 7761803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. User-operated speech in noise test: implementation and comparison with a traditional test.
    Pedersen ER; Juhl PM
    Int J Audiol; 2014 May; 53(5):336-44. PubMed ID: 24329491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pure tone audiograms from hearing-impaired children. II. Predicting speech-hearing from the audiogram.
    Bamford JM; Wilson IM; Atkinson D; Bench J
    Br J Audiol; 1981 Feb; 15(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 7214068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effect of varying the amplitude-frequency response on the masked speech-reception threshold of sentences for hearing-impaired listeners.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Festen JM; Plomp R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1989 Aug; 86(2):621-8. PubMed ID: 2768675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Speech-reception threshold in noise for hearing-impaired listeners in conditions with a varying amplitude-frequency response.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Festen JM; Plomp R
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():202-6. PubMed ID: 2356728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of the preliminary auditory profile test battery in an international multi-centre study.
    van Esch TE; Kollmeier B; Vormann M; Lyzenga J; Houtgast T; Hällgren M; Larsby B; Athalye SP; Lutman ME; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):305-21. PubMed ID: 23570289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech recognition threshold in slightly and fully modulated noise for hearing-impaired subjects.
    Hagerman B
    Int J Audiol; 2002 Sep; 41(6):321-9. PubMed ID: 12353604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. II. Correlation analysis.
    Divenyi PL; Haupt KM
    Ear Hear; 1997 Apr; 18(2):100-13. PubMed ID: 9099559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The impact of head angle on monaural and binaural performance with directional and omnidirectional hearing aids.
    Ricketts T
    Ear Hear; 2000 Aug; 21(4):318-28. PubMed ID: 10981608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.