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.
4. Establishment of age-specific normative data for the canadian French version of the hearing in noise test for children. Vaillancourt V; Laroche C; Giguère C; Soli SD Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):453-66. PubMed ID: 18349705 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The influence of semantically related and unrelated text cues on the intelligibility of sentences in noise. Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Festen JM; van Beek JH; Rönnberg J Ear Hear; 2011; 32(6):e16-25. PubMed ID: 21826004 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S). Cameron S; Dillon H Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An Evaluation of the BKB-SIN, HINT, QuickSIN, and WIN Materials on Listeners With Normal Hearing and Listeners With Hearing Loss. Wilson RH; McArdle RA; Smith SL J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Aug; 50(4):844-56. PubMed ID: 17675590 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Understanding speech in noise after correction of congenital unilateral aural atresia: effects of age in the emergence of binaural squelch but not in use of head-shadow. Gray L; Kesser B; Cole E Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2009 Sep; 73(9):1281-7. PubMed ID: 19581007 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Content and procedural learning in repeated sentence tests of speech perception. Yund EW; Woods DL Ear Hear; 2010 Dec; 31(6):769-78. PubMed ID: 20562624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Ageing without hearing loss or cognitive impairment causes a decrease in speech intelligibility only in informational maskers. Rajan R; Cainer KE Neuroscience; 2008 Jun; 154(2):784-95. PubMed ID: 18485606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Context effects in speech recognition of sentences]. Züst HJ; Tschopp K Laryngorhinootologie; 1995 Apr; 74(4):259-63. PubMed ID: 7772229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Speech recognition materials and ceiling effects: considerations for cochlear implant programs. Gifford RH; Shallop JK; Peterson AM Audiol Neurootol; 2008; 13(3):193-205. PubMed ID: 18212519 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The HSM sentence test as a tool for evaluating the speech understanding in noise of cochlear implant users. Hochmair-Desoyer I; Schulz E; Moser L; Schmidt M Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S83. PubMed ID: 9391610 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The consistency of sentence intelligibility across three types of signal distortion. Healy EW; Montgomery AA J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):270-82. PubMed ID: 17463229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Learning effect observed for the speech reception threshold in interrupted noise with normal hearing listeners. Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA Int J Audiol; 2008 Apr; 47(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 18389414 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The foreign language cocktail party problem: Energetic and informational masking effects in non-native speech perception. Cooke M; Garcia Lecumberri ML; Barker J J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jan; 123(1):414-27. PubMed ID: 18177170 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Audiovisual perception of speech in noise and masked written text. Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T Ear Hear; 2008 Jan; 29(1):99-111. PubMed ID: 18091101 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effect of masker modulation depth on speech masking release. Gnansia D; Jourdes V; Lorenzi C Hear Res; 2008 May; 239(1-2):60-8. PubMed ID: 18434049 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Word discrimination in the presence of competing speech with children. Chermak GD; Zielonko B J Am Audiol Soc; 1977; 2(5):188-92. PubMed ID: 856780 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]