118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22122354)
1. Comparison of three types of French speech-in-noise tests: a multi-center study.
Jansen S; Luts H; Wagener KC; Kollmeier B; Del Rio M; Dauman R; James C; Fraysse B; Vormès E; Frachet B; Wouters J; van Wieringen A
Int J Audiol; 2012 Mar; 51(3):164-73. PubMed ID: 22122354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The French digit triplet test: a hearing screening tool for speech intelligibility in noise.
Jansen S; Luts H; Wagener KC; Frachet B; Wouters J
Int J Audiol; 2010 May; 49(5):378-87. PubMed ID: 20380611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A Spanish matrix sentence test for assessing speech reception thresholds in noise.
Hochmuth S; Brand T; Zokoll MA; Castro FZ; Wardenga N; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2012 Jul; 51(7):536-44. PubMed ID: 22537033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The development and evaluation of the Finnish Matrix Sentence Test for speech intelligibility assessment.
Dietz A; Buschermöhle M; Aarnisalo AA; Vanhanen A; Hyyrynen T; Aaltonen O; Löppönen H; Zokoll MA; Kollmeier B
Acta Otolaryngol; 2014 Jul; 134(7):728-37. PubMed ID: 24807850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Establishment of age-specific normative data for the canadian French version of the hearing in noise test for children.
Vaillancourt V; Laroche C; Giguère C; Soli SD
Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):453-66. PubMed ID: 18349705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Prediction of the intelligibility for speech in real-life background noises for subjects with normal hearing.
Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
Ear Hear; 2008 Apr; 29(2):169-75. PubMed ID: 18490862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry.
Hagerman B
Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Modelling the speech reception threshold in non-stationary noise in hearing-impaired listeners as a function of level.
Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; de Laat JA; Dreschler WA
Int J Audiol; 2010 Nov; 49(11):856-65. PubMed ID: 20936997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. LIST and LINT: sentences and numbers for quantifying speech understanding in severely impaired listeners for Flanders and the Netherlands.
van Wieringen A; Wouters J
Int J Audiol; 2008 Jun; 47(6):348-55. PubMed ID: 18569107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. New measures of masked text recognition in relation to speech-in-noise perception and their associations with age and cognitive abilities.
Besser J; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Rönnberg J; Festen JM
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2012 Feb; 55(1):194-209. PubMed ID: 22199191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The influence of semantically related and unrelated text cues on the intelligibility of sentences in noise.
Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Festen JM; van Beek JH; Rönnberg J
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(6):e16-25. PubMed ID: 21826004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Learning effect observed for the speech reception threshold in interrupted noise with normal hearing listeners.
Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
Int J Audiol; 2008 Apr; 47(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 18389414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. How much does language proficiency by non-native listeners influence speech audiometric tests in noise?
Warzybok A; Brand T; Wagener KC; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():88-99. PubMed ID: 26344170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Polish sentence tests for measuring the intelligibility of speech in interfering noise.
Ozimek E; Kutzner D; Sek A; Wicher A
Int J Audiol; 2009; 48(7):433-43. PubMed ID: 19925330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
