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 *

418 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21047292)

  • 1. Speech understanding in noise with an eyeglass hearing aid: asymmetric fitting and the head shadow benefit of anterior microphones.
    Mens LH
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):27-33. PubMed ID: 21047292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical evaluation of a new hearing aid anti-cardioid directivity pattern.
    Mueller HG; Weber J; Bellanova M
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):249-54. PubMed ID: 21271803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sound source localization using hearing aids with microphones placed behind-the-ear, in-the-canal, and in-the-pinna.
    Van den Bogaert T; Carette E; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Mar; 50(3):164-76. PubMed ID: 21208034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Severe difficulties with word recognition in noise after platinum chemotherapy in childhood, and improvements with open-fitting hearing-aids.
    Einarsson EJ; Petersen H; Wiebe T; Fransson PA; Magnusson M; Moëll C
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Oct; 50(10):642-51. PubMed ID: 21812630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Own voice qualities (OVQ) in hearing-aid users: there is more than just occlusion.
    Laugesen S; Jensen NS; Maas P; Nielsen C
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):226-36. PubMed ID: 21275499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The Danish hearing in noise test.
    Nielsen JB; Dau T
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Mar; 50(3):202-8. PubMed ID: 21319937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm.
    Fink N; Furst M; Muchnik C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1718-31. PubMed ID: 22978899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Hearing impairment and self-masking: listening during vocalization.
    Borg E; Wikström C; Gustafsson D
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Jul; 51(7):529-35. PubMed ID: 22686438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of the fine structure processing (FSP) strategy and the CIS strategy used in the MED-EL cochlear implant system: speech intelligibility and music sound quality.
    Magnusson L
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):279-87. PubMed ID: 21190508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Understanding the effect of noise on electrical stimulation sequences in cochlear implants and its impact on speech intelligibility.
    Qazi OU; van Dijk B; Moonen M; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2013 May; 299():79-87. PubMed ID: 23396271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Speech recognition in noise using bilateral open-fit hearing aids: the limited benefit of directional microphones and noise reduction.
    Magnusson L; Claesson A; Persson M; Tengstrand T
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Jan; 52(1):29-36. PubMed ID: 22928919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of spatial separation, extended bandwidth, and compression speed on intelligibility in a competing-speech task.
    Moore BC; Füllgrabe C; Stone MA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jul; 128(1):360-71. PubMed ID: 20649230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Revision, extension, and evaluation of a binaural speech intelligibility model.
    Beutelmann R; Brand T; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Apr; 127(4):2479-97. PubMed ID: 20370031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Long-term effects of non-linear frequency compression for children with moderate hearing loss.
    Wolfe J; John A; Schafer E; Nyffeler M; Boretzki M; Caraway T; Hudson M
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jun; 50(6):396-404. PubMed ID: 21599615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sentence perception in listening conditions having similar speech intelligibility indices.
    Gustafson SJ; Pittman AL
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 21047291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Preferred signal path delay and high-pass cut-off in open fittings.
    Bramsløw L
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Sep; 49(9):634-44. PubMed ID: 20602601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Multichannel compression hearing aids: effect of channel bandwidth on consonant and vowel identification by hearing-impaired listeners.
    Strelcyk O; Li N; Rodriguez J; Kalluri S; Edwards B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1598-606. PubMed ID: 23464029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests.
    Francart T; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):2-13. PubMed ID: 21091261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Contrasting benefits from contralateral implants and hearing aids in cochlear implant users.
    van Hoesel RJ
    Hear Res; 2012 Jun; 288(1-2):100-13. PubMed ID: 22226928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.