307 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21047297)
1. Reference sound pressure level for Korean speech audiometry.
Han H; Lee J; Cho S; Kim J; Lee K; Choi WD
Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):59-62. PubMed ID: 21047297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The development of psychometrically equivalent Cantonese speech audiometry materials.
Nissen SL; Harris RW; Channell RW; Conklin B; Kim M; Wong L
Int J Audiol; 2011 Mar; 50(3):191-201. PubMed ID: 21319936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response.
Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR
Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17804982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Evaluation of cochlear hearing disorders: normative distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements.
Mills DM; Feeney MP; Gates GA
Ear Hear; 2007 Dec; 28(6):778-92. PubMed ID: 17982366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise.
Ozimek E; Warzybok A; Kutzner D
Int J Audiol; 2010 Jun; 49(6):444-54. PubMed ID: 20482292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effects of stimulus level on the speech perception abilities of children using cochlear implants or digital hearing aids.
Davidson LS
Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):493-507. PubMed ID: 16957500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Audibility of American English vowels produced by English-, Chinese-, and Korean-native speakers in long-term speech-shaped noise.
Liu C; Jin SH
Hear Res; 2011 Dec; 282(1-2):49-55. PubMed ID: 21920420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.
Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 20588118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Psychometrically equivalent Russian speech audiometry materials by male and female talkers.
Harris RW; Nissen SL; Pola MG; McPherson DL; Tavartkiladze GA; Eggett DL
Int J Audiol; 2007 Jan; 46(1):47-66. PubMed ID: 17365055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: the German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype.
Zokoll MA; Wagener KC; Brand T; Buschermöhle M; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2012 Sep; 51(9):697-707. PubMed ID: 22762202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test.
Warzybok A; Zokoll M; Wardenga N; Ozimek E; Boboshko M; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():35-43. PubMed ID: 25843088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test.
Zokoll MA; Fidan D; Türkyılmaz D; Hochmuth S; Ergenç İ; Sennaroğlu G; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():51-61. PubMed ID: 26443486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment.
Wardenga N; Batsoulis C; Wagener KC; Brand T; Lenarz T; Maier H
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():71-9. PubMed ID: 26555195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Estimates of basilar-membrane nonlinearity effects on masking of tones and speech.
Dubno JR; Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB
Ear Hear; 2007 Feb; 28(1):2-17. PubMed ID: 17204895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Modeling speech intelligibility in quiet and noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
Rhebergen KS; Lyzenga J; Dreschler WA; Festen JM
J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Mar; 127(3):1570-83. PubMed ID: 20329857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of compact disk recording protocols on reliability and comparability of speech audiometry outcomes: acoustic analysis.
Di Berardino F; Tognola G; Paglialonga A; Alpini D; Grandori F; Cesarani A
J Laryngol Otol; 2010 Aug; 124(8):859-63. PubMed ID: 20441674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry.
Hagerman B
Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of hearing thresholds obtained using pure-tone behavioral audiometry, the Cantonese Hearing in Noise Test (CHINT) and cortical evoked response audiometry.
Wong LL; Cheung C; Wong EC
Acta Otolaryngol; 2008 Jun; 128(6):654-60. PubMed ID: 18568500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
