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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2072693)

  • 1. Toleration of background noises: relationship with patterns of hearing aid use by elderly persons.
    Nabelek AK; Tucker FM; Letowski TR
    J Speech Hear Res; 1991 Jun; 34(3):679-85. PubMed ID: 2072693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Acceptable noise level (ANL) with Danish and non-semantic speech materials in adult hearing-aid users.
    Olsen SØ; Lantz J; Nielsen LH; Brännström KJ
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Sep; 51(9):678-88. PubMed ID: 22731922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Acceptance of noise growth patterns in hearing aid users.
    Freyaldenhoven MC; Plyler PN; Thelin JW; Muenchen RA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Feb; 51(1):126-35. PubMed ID: 18230860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Acclimatization in first-time hearing aid users using three different fitting protocols.
    Reber MB; Kompis M
    Auris Nasus Larynx; 2005 Dec; 32(4):345-51. PubMed ID: 16039083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Identifying the needs of elderly, hearing-impaired persons: the importance and utility of hearing aid attributes.
    Meister H; Lausberg I; Kiessling J; von Wedel H; Walger M
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2002 Nov; 259(10):531-4. PubMed ID: 12434187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Reliability and validity of judgments of sound quality in elderly hearing aid wearers.
    Narendran MM; Humes LE
    Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1):4-11. PubMed ID: 12598808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
    Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Population study of the ability to benefit from amplification and the provision of a hearing aid in 55-74-year-old first-time hearing aid users.
    Davis A
    Int J Audiol; 2003 Jul; 42 Suppl 2():2S39-52. PubMed ID: 12918628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users.
    Looi V; McDermott H; McKay C; Hickson L
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):421-34. PubMed ID: 18344870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparisons of quality ratings for music by cochlear implant and hearing aid users.
    Looi V; McDermott H; McKay C; Hickson L
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2 Suppl):59S-61S. PubMed ID: 17496649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Evaluation of hearing improvement due to hearing aids].
    Welzl-Müller K; Sattler K
    HNO; 1985 Jun; 33(6):275-8. PubMed ID: 4030411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intelligibility in noise using multimicrophone hearing aids.
    Lurquin P; Rafhay S
    Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg; 1996; 50(2):103-9. PubMed ID: 8767253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of amplification systems in a classroom.
    Nábĕlek AK; Donahue AM; Letowski TR
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1986 Jan; 23(1):41-52. PubMed ID: 3958997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and its relationship to aided reported handicap and hearing aid satisfaction.
    Saunders GH; Forsline A
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):229-42. PubMed ID: 16672792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Full time directional versus user selectable microphone modes in hearing aids.
    Ricketts T; Henry P; Gnewikow D
    Ear Hear; 2003 Oct; 24(5):424-39. PubMed ID: 14534412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.