688 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23550584)
1. Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users.
Ng EH; Rudner M; Lunner T; Pedersen MS; Rönnberg J
Int J Audiol; 2013 Jul; 52(7):433-41. PubMed ID: 23550584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Dynamic relation between working memory capacity and speech recognition in noise during the first 6 months of hearing aid use.
Ng EH; Classon E; Larsby B; Arlinger S; Lunner T; Rudner M; Rönnberg J
Trends Hear; 2014 Nov; 18():. PubMed ID: 25421088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessment of hearing aid algorithms using a master hearing aid: the influence of hearing aid experience on the relationship between speech recognition and cognitive capacity.
Rählmann S; Meis M; Schulte M; Kießling J; Walger M; Meister H
Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S105-S111. PubMed ID: 28449597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Noise reduction improves memory for target language speech in competing native but not foreign language speech.
Ng EH; Rudner M; Lunner T; Rönnberg J
Ear Hear; 2015 Jan; 36(1):82-91. PubMed ID: 25166628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Placebo effects in hearing-aid trials are reliable.
Dawes P; Hopkins R; Munro KJ
Int J Audiol; 2013 Jul; 52(7):472-7. PubMed ID: 23594421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Binaural dichotic presentation to reduce the effects of spectral masking in moderate bilateral sensorineural hearing loss.
Kulkarni PN; Pandey PC; Jangamashetti DS
Int J Audiol; 2012 Apr; 51(4):334-44. PubMed ID: 22201526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Speech quality evaluation of a sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm with normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
Sang J; Hu H; Zheng C; Li G; Lutman ME; Bleeck S
Hear Res; 2015 Sep; 327():175-85. PubMed ID: 26232529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Hearing-aid users' voices: a factor that could affect directional benefit.
Wu YH; Stangl E; Bentler RA
Int J Audiol; 2013 Nov; 52(11):789-94. PubMed ID: 23777478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant.
Lenarz T; James C; Cuda D; Fitzgerald O'Connor A; Frachet B; Frijns JH; Klenzner T; Laszig R; Manrique M; Marx M; Merkus P; Mylanus EA; Offeciers E; Pesch J; Ramos-Macias A; Robier A; Sterkers O; Uziel A
Int J Audiol; 2013 Dec; 52(12):838-48. PubMed ID: 23992489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Danish reading span data from 283 hearing-aid users, including a sub-group analysis of their relationship to speech-in-noise performance.
Borch Petersen E; Lunner T; Vestergaard MD; Sundewall Thorén E
Int J Audiol; 2016; 55(4):254-61. PubMed ID: 26836955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Masking release for hearing-impaired listeners: The effect of increased audibility through reduction of amplitude variability.
Desloge JG; Reed CM; Braida LD; Perez ZD; D'Aquila LA
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4452. PubMed ID: 28679277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The performance of an automatic acoustic-based program classifier compared to hearing aid users' manual selection of listening programs.
Searchfield GD; Linford T; Kobayashi K; Crowhen D; Latzel M
Int J Audiol; 2018 Mar; 57(3):201-212. PubMed ID: 29069954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Acoustic and perceptual effects of magnifying interaural difference cues in a simulated "binaural" hearing aid.
de Taillez T; Grimm G; Kollmeier B; Neher T
Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S81-S91. PubMed ID: 28395561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An algorithm to improve speech recognition in noise for hearing-impaired listeners.
Healy EW; Yoho SE; Wang Y; Wang D
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):3029-38. PubMed ID: 24116438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Gated auditory speech perception in elderly hearing aid users and elderly normal-hearing individuals: effects of hearing impairment and cognitive capacity.
Moradi S; Lidestam B; Hällgren M; Rönnberg J
Trends Hear; 2014 Jul; 18():. PubMed ID: 25085610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The influence of informational masking on speech perception and pupil response in adults with hearing impairment.
Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1596-606. PubMed ID: 24606294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
