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 *

204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17062498)

  • 21. Potential benefits and limitations of three types of directional processing in hearing aids.
    Picou EM; Aspell E; Ricketts TA
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(3):339-52. PubMed ID: 24518429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A comparison of CIC and BTE hearing aids for three-dimensional localization of speech.
    Best V; Kalluri S; McLachlan S; Valentine S; Edwards B; Carlile S
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Oct; 49(10):723-32. PubMed ID: 20515424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Factors influencing individual variation in perceptual directional microphone benefit.
    Keidser G; Dillon H; Convery E; Mejia J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013; 24(10):955-68. PubMed ID: 24384081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Using hearing aid adaptive directional microphones to enhance cochlear implant performance.
    Chung K; Zeng FG
    Hear Res; 2009 Apr; 250(1-2):27-37. PubMed ID: 19450437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Clinical measures of hearing aid directivity: assumption, accuracy, and reliability.
    Wu YH; Bentler RA
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(1):44-56. PubMed ID: 21826003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Benefit from spatial separation of multiple talkers in bilateral hearing-aid users: Effects of hearing loss, age, and cognition.
    Neher T; Behrens T; Carlile S; Jin C; Kragelund L; Petersen AS; Schaik Av
    Int J Audiol; 2009 Nov; 48(11):758-74. PubMed ID: 19951144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The effect of hearing aid signal-processing schemes on acceptable noise levels: perception and prediction.
    Wu YH; Stangl E
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):333-41. PubMed ID: 23334355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Effects of frequency modulation (FM) transmitter microphone directivity on speech perception in noise.
    Lewis MS; Crandell CC; Kreisman NV
    Am J Audiol; 2004 Jun; 13(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 15248800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Measuring real-ear signal-to-noise ratio: application to directional hearing aids.
    Bell SL; Creeke SA; Lutman ME
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Mar; 49(3):238-46. PubMed ID: 20151932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Efficacy of a reverse cardioid directional microphone.
    Kuk F; Keenan D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 Jan; 23(1):64-73. PubMed ID: 22284842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Directional hearing aids: then and now.
    Ricketts TA
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2005; 42(4 Suppl 2):133-44. PubMed ID: 16470469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS+ processing.
    Grantham DW; Ashmead DH; Ricketts TA; Haynes DS; Labadie RF
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jan; 29(1):33-44. PubMed ID: 18091105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The challenge of localizing vehicle backup alarms: effects of passive and electronic hearing protectors, ambient noise level, and backup alarm spectral content.
    Alali KA; Casali JG
    Noise Health; 2011; 13(51):99-112. PubMed ID: 21368435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effects of coordinated compression and pinna compensation features on horizontal localization performance in hearing aid users.
    Korhonen P; Lau C; Kuk F; Keenan D; Schumacher J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Jan; 26(1):80-92. PubMed ID: 25597463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effect of multimicrophone noise reduction systems on sound source localization by users of binaural hearing aids.
    Van den Bogaert T; Doclo S; Wouters J; Moonen M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jul; 124(1):484-97. PubMed ID: 18646992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Long-term usage of modern signal processing by listeners with severe or profound hearing loss: a retrospective survey.
    Keidser G; Hartley D; Carter L
    Am J Audiol; 2008 Dec; 17(2):136-46. PubMed ID: 18840704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.