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 *

527 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25690773)

  • 1. High-frequency audibility: the effects of audiometric configuration, stimulus type, and device.
    Kimlinger C; McCreery R; Lewis D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Feb; 26(2):128-37. PubMed ID: 25690773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses as an Objective Aided Outcome Measure: Effect of Stimulus Level, Bandwidth, and Amplification in Adults With Hearing Loss.
    Easwar V; Purcell DW; Aiken SJ; Parsa V; Scollie SD
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):635-52. PubMed ID: 26226606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss.
    Seeto A; Searchfield GD
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Mar; 29(3):243-254. PubMed ID: 29488874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Spatial benefit of bilateral hearing AIDS.
    Ahlstrom JB; Horwitz AR; Dubno JR
    Ear Hear; 2009 Apr; 30(2):203-18. PubMed ID: 19194292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of Directional Microphone and Noise Reduction on Subcortical and Cortical Auditory-Evoked Potentials in Older Listeners With Hearing Loss.
    Slugocki C; Kuk F; Korhonen P
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1282-1293. PubMed ID: 32058351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.
    Johnson EE; Dillon H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of Stimulus Level and Bandwidth on Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Adults With Normal Hearing.
    Easwar V; Purcell DW; Aiken SJ; Parsa V; Scollie SD
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):619-34. PubMed ID: 26226607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cortical auditory-evoked potentials (CAEPs) in adults in response to filtered speech stimuli.
    Carter L; Dillon H; Seymour J; Seeto M; Van Dun B
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):807-22. PubMed ID: 24224988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of frequency compression and frequency transposition on fricative and affricate perception in listeners with normal hearing and mild to moderate hearing loss.
    Alexander JM; Kopun JG; Stelmachowicz PG
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(5):519-32. PubMed ID: 24699702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of wideband frequency responses and nonlinear frequency compression for children with cookie-bite audiometric configurations.
    John A; Wolfe J; Scollie S; Schafer E; Hudson M; Woods W; Wheeler J; Hudgens K; Neumann S
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2014; 25(10):1022-33. PubMed ID: 25514454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Listener Performance with a Novel Hearing Aid Frequency Lowering Technique.
    Kirby BJ; Kopun JG; Spratford M; Mollak CM; Brennan MA; McCreery RW
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Oct; 28(9):810-822. PubMed ID: 28972470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Relationship of Grammatical Context on Children's Recognition of s/z-Inflected Words.
    Spratford M; McLean HH; McCreery R
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Oct; 28(9):799-809. PubMed ID: 28972469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Human Frequency Following Responses to Filtered Speech.
    Ananthakrishnan S; Grinstead L; Yurjevich D
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(1):87-105. PubMed ID: 33369591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Telecoil-mode hearing aid compatibility performance requirements for wireless and cordless handsets: magnetic signal levels.
    Julstrom S; Kozma-Spytek L; Isabelle S
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Sep; 22(8):515-27. PubMed ID: 22031676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cochlear dead regions in typical hearing aid candidates: prevalence and implications for use of high-frequency speech cues.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Johnson J; Rivera I
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(3):339-48. PubMed ID: 21522068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children.
    McCreery RW; Brennan M; Walker EA; Spratford M
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Oct; 28(9):861-875. PubMed ID: 28972473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Perceptual Benefits of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aids With Children: A Within-Subject Design Using Clinically Available Hearing Aids.
    Van Eeckhoutte M; Scollie S; O'Hagan R; Glista D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2020 Nov; 63(11):3834-3846. PubMed ID: 33002368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Application of frequency importance functions to directivity for prediction of benefit in uniform fields.
    Ricketts TA; Henry PP; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2005 Oct; 26(5):473-86. PubMed ID: 16230897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise.
    Turner CW; Henry BA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Oct; 112(4):1675-80. PubMed ID: 12398472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Difference between the default telecoil (t-coil) and programmed microphone frequency response in behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids.
    Putterman DB; Valente M
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 May; 23(5):366-78. PubMed ID: 22533979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 27.