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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18056883)

  • 1. Contribution of high-frequency information to the acceptance of background noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Plyler PN; Madix SG; Thelin JW; Johnston KW
    Am J Audiol; 2007 Dec; 16(2):149-56. PubMed ID: 18056883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Recognition of digits in different types of noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Smits C; Houtgast T
    Int J Audiol; 2007 Mar; 46(3):134-44. PubMed ID: 17365067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Audibility-index predictions of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the connected speech test.
    Sherbecoe RL; Studebaker GA
    Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1):71-88. PubMed ID: 12598814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Word recognition performance in continuous and interrupted broad-band noise by normal-hearing and simulated hearing-impaired listeners.
    Stuart A; Phillips DP; Green WB
    Am J Otol; 1995 Sep; 16(5):658-63. PubMed ID: 8588673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Perception of spectral contrast by hearing-impaired listeners.
    Dreisbach LE; Leek MR; Lentz JJ
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Aug; 48(4):910-21. PubMed ID: 16378482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Spectral contributions to the benefit from spatial separation of speech and noise.
    Dubno JR; Ahlstrom JB; Horwitz AR
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Dec; 45(6):1297-310. PubMed ID: 12546495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Relation between pure tone audiometry and speech audiometry in various hearing-impaired listeners].
    He LP
    Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 1993; 28(1):29-31, 59. PubMed ID: 8352994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Interference and enhancement effects on interaural time discrimination and level discrimination in listeners with normal hearing and those with hearing loss.
    Smith-Olinde L; Besing J; Koehnke J
    Am J Audiol; 2004 Jun; 13(1):80-95. PubMed ID: 15248807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. On the limited transfer of information with noise-induced hearing loss.
    Smoorenburg GF
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():38-46. PubMed ID: 2356737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise.
    Turner CW; Henry BA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Oct; 112(4):1675-80. PubMed ID: 12398472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of subtle mid-frequency auditory dysfunction upon speech discrimination in noise.
    Findlay RC; Denenberg LJ
    Audiology; 1977; 16(3):252-9. PubMed ID: 880129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Frequency-compression outcomes in listeners with steeply sloping audiograms.
    Simpson A; Hersbach AA; McDermott HJ
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Nov; 45(11):619-29. PubMed ID: 17118905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in multi-talker babble: a preliminary report.
    Wilson RH; Strouse A
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2002; 39(1):105-13. PubMed ID: 11926322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Hogan CA; Turner CW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Jul; 104(1):432-41. PubMed ID: 9670535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech masking release in listeners with flat hearing loss: effects of masker fluctuation rate on identification scores and phonetic feature reception.
    Lorenzi C; Husson M; Ardoint M; Debruille X
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Sep; 45(9):487-95. PubMed ID: 17005491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Hearing loss and the limits of amplification.
    Turner CW
    Audiol Neurootol; 2006; 11 Suppl 1():2-5. PubMed ID: 17063003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of speech presentation level on acceptance of background noise in listeners with normal hearing.
    Franklin CA; Thelin JW; Nabelek AK; Burchfield SB
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2006 Feb; 17(2):141-6. PubMed ID: 16640066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of intensity perturbations on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    van Schijndel NH; Houtgast T; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 May; 109(5 Pt 1):2202-10. PubMed ID: 11386571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.