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 *

768 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26809324)

  • 1. The Effects of Hearing Aid Directional Microphone and Noise Reduction Processing on Listening Effort in Older Adults with Hearing Loss.
    Desjardins JL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Jan; 27(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 26809324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effect of hearing aid noise reduction on listening effort in hearing-impaired adults.
    Desjardins JL; Doherty KA
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):600-10. PubMed ID: 24622352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of hearing aid technologies on listening in an automobile.
    Wu YH; Stangl E; Bentler RA; Stanziola RW
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Jun; 24(6):474-85. PubMed ID: 23886425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech Perception in Noise and Listening Effort of Older Adults With Nonlinear Frequency Compression Hearing Aids.
    Shehorn J; Marrone N; Muller T
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):215-225. PubMed ID: 28806193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. How directional microphones affect speech recognition, listening effort and localisation for listeners with moderate-to-severe hearing loss.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Dec; 56(12):909-918. PubMed ID: 28738747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.
    Desjardins JL; Doherty KA
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):261-72. PubMed ID: 23095723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Potential benefits and limitations of three types of directional processing in hearing aids.
    Picou EM; Aspell E; Ricketts TA
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(3):339-52. PubMed ID: 24518429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effects of hearing aid use on listening effort and mental fatigue associated with sustained speech processing demands.
    Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):523-34. PubMed ID: 23426091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Investigating Speech Recognition and listening effort with different device configurations in adult cochlear implant users.
    Sladen DP; Nie Y; Berg K
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 May; 19(3):119-130. PubMed ID: 29457564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):e52-64. PubMed ID: 23416751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effect of changing the secondary task in dual-task paradigms for measuring listening effort.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):611-22. PubMed ID: 24992491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Measuring listening effort: driving simulator versus simple dual-task paradigm.
    Wu YH; Aksan N; Rizzo M; Stangl E; Zhang X; Bentler R
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):623-32. PubMed ID: 25083599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Impact of Noise and Noise Reduction on Processing Effort: A Pupillometry Study.
    Wendt D; Hietkamp RK; Lunner T
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(6):690-700. PubMed ID: 28640038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Tracking of Noise Tolerance to Measure Hearing Aid Benefit.
    Kuk F; Seper E; Lau CC; Korhonen P
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Sep; 28(8):698-707. PubMed ID: 28906241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Individual Differences Offer Insight Into Clinical Recommendations for Directional and Remote Microphone Technology Use in Children.
    Gustafson SJ; Ricketts TA; Picou EM
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2021 Feb; 64(2):635-650. PubMed ID: 33465321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Measuring the Influence of Noise Reduction on Listening Effort in Hearing-Impaired Listeners Using Response Times to an Arithmetic Task in Noise.
    Reinten I; De Ronde-Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler W
    Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211014437. PubMed ID: 34027725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology.
    Gravel JS; Fausel N; Liskow C; Chobot J
    Ear Hear; 1999 Feb; 20(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 10037061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech recognition for bilaterally asymmetric and symmetric hearing aid microphone modes in simulated classroom environments.
    Ricketts TA; Picou EM
    Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):601-9. PubMed ID: 23524508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of directional sound processing and listener's motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech: Do normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners differ?
    Mirkovic B; Debener S; Schmidt J; Jaeger M; Neher T
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():260-270. PubMed ID: 31003037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 39.