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 *

70 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16777779)

  • 1. The subjective evaluation of the expansion time constant in single-channel wide dynamic range compression hearing instruments.
    Plyler PN; Trine TD; Blair Hill A
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Jun; 45(6):331-6. PubMed ID: 16777779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The objective and subjective evaluation of multichannel expansion in wide dynamic range compression hearing instruments.
    Plyler PN; Lowery KJ; Hamby HM; Trine TD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Feb; 50(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 17344545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effects of high-frequency amplification on the objective and subjective performance of hearing instrument users with varying degrees of high-frequency hearing loss.
    Plyler PN; Fleck EL
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Jun; 49(3):616-27. PubMed ID: 16787899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Experimental evaluation of different methods of limiting the maximum output of hearing aids.
    Savage I; Dillon H; Byrne D; Bächler H
    Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):550-62. PubMed ID: 16957504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The design and evaluation of a hearing aid with trainable amplification parameters.
    Zakis JA; Dillon H; McDermott HJ
    Ear Hear; 2007 Dec; 28(6):812-30. PubMed ID: 17982368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Music preferences with hearing aids: effects of signal properties, compression settings, and listener characteristics.
    Croghan NB; Arehart KH; Kates JM
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(5):e170-84. PubMed ID: 25010635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The effects of expansion on the objective and subjective performance of hearing instrument users.
    Plyler PN; Hill AB; Trine TD
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2005 Feb; 16(2):101-13. PubMed ID: 15807049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Do experienced hearing aid users know how to use their hearing AIDS correctly?
    Desjardins JL; Doherty KA
    Am J Audiol; 2009 Jun; 18(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 19380509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of single-channel linear amplification and two-channel wide-dynamic-range-compression amplification by means of an independent-group design.
    Humes LE; Humes LE; Wilson DL
    Am J Audiol; 2004 Jun; 13(1):39-53. PubMed ID: 15248803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of multi-channel wide dynamic range compression, noise reduction, and the directional microphone on horizontal localization performance in hearing aid wearers.
    Keidser G; Rohrseitz K; Dillon H; Hamacher V; Carter L; Rass U; Convery E
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Oct; 45(10):563-79. PubMed ID: 17062498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of the desired sensation level [input/output] algorithm for adults with hearing loss: the acceptable range for amplified conversational speech.
    Jenstad LM; Bagatto MP; Seewald RC; Scollie SD; Cornelisse LE; Scicluna R
    Ear Hear; 2007 Dec; 28(6):793-811. PubMed ID: 17982367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measurement of hearing aid outcome in the elderly: comparison between young and old elderly.
    Chang WH; Tseng HC; Chao TK; Hsu CJ; Liu TC
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2008 Jun; 138(6):730-4. PubMed ID: 18503844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation of satisfaction measures of analog and digital hearing aid users.
    Magni C; Freiberger F; Tonn K
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2005; 71(5):650-7. PubMed ID: 16612528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Satisfaction with hearing aids: a consumer research perspective.
    Wong LL; Hickson L; McPherson B
    Int J Audiol; 2009; 48(7):405-27. PubMed ID: 19925328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Ranking hearing aid input-output functions for understanding low-, conversational-, and high-level speech in multitalker babble.
    Chung K; Killion MC; Christensen LA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):304-22. PubMed ID: 17463231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Temporal envelope changes of compression and speech rate: combined effects on recognition for older adults.
    Jenstad LM; Souza PE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Oct; 50(5):1123-38. PubMed ID: 17905900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using genetic algorithms with subjective input from human subjects: implications for fitting hearing aids and cochlear implants.
    Başkent D; Eiler CL; Edwards B
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):370-80. PubMed ID: 17485986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The objective and subjective evaluation of low-frequency expansion in wide dynamic range compression hearing instruments.
    Lowery KJ; Plyler PN
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2007 Sep; 18(8):641-52. PubMed ID: 18326151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.