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. The effect of ear protectors on word discrimination in subject with normal hearing and subjects with noise-induced hearing loss. Chung DY; Gannon RP J Am Aud Soc; 1979; 5(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 511652 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study. Morera C; Manrique M; Ramos A; Garcia-Ibanez L; Cavalle L; Huarte A; Castillo C; Estrada E Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jun; 125(6):596-606. PubMed ID: 16076708 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effect of wearing time on hearing protector attenuation. Abel SM; Rokas D J Otolaryngol; 1986 Oct; 15(5):293-7. PubMed ID: 3773044 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears. Mok M; Grayden D; Dowell RC; Lawrence D J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):338-51. PubMed ID: 16671848 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Auditory perception with level-dependent hearing protectors. The effects of age and hearing loss. Abel SM; Armstrong NM; Giguère C Scand Audiol; 1993; 22(2):71-85. PubMed ID: 8322001 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of hearing protection on narrowband signal detection in industrial noise. Abel SM; Kunov H; Pichora-Fuller MK; Alberti PW J Otolaryngol; 1983 Apr; 12(2):83-8. PubMed ID: 6864854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Development and evaluation of the listening in spatialized noise test. Cameron S; Dillon H; Newall P Ear Hear; 2006 Feb; 27(1):30-42. PubMed ID: 16446563 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Speech recognition in noise with active and passive hearing protectors: a comparative study. Bockstael A; De Coensel B; Botteldooren D; D'Haenens W; Keppler H; Maes L; Philips B; Swinnen F; Bart V J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3702-15. PubMed ID: 21682395 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Double hearing protection and speech intelligibility-room for improvement. Wagstaff AS; Woxen OJ Aviat Space Environ Med; 2001 Apr; 72(4):400-4. PubMed ID: 11318022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings. James CJ; Skinner MW; Martin LF; Holden LK; Galvin KL; Holden TA; Whitford L Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):157-74. PubMed ID: 12677112 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Speech intelligibility in noise with ear protectors. Abel SM; Alberti PW; Riko K J Otolaryngol; 1980 Jun; 9(3):256-65. PubMed ID: 7001041 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Intelligibility of speech in noise at high presentation levels: effects of hearing loss and frequency region. Summers V; Cord MT J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Aug; 122(2):1130-7. PubMed ID: 17672659 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Active noise reduction versus conventional hearing protection. Relative benefits for normal-hearing and impaired listeners. Abel SM; Spencer DL Scand Audiol; 1997; 26(3):155-67. PubMed ID: 9309811 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Laske RD; Veraguth D; Dillier N; Binkert A; Holzmann D; Huber AM Otol Neurotol; 2009 Apr; 30(3):313-8. PubMed ID: 19318885 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]