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.
160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28464618)
1. Syllable-constituent perception by hearing-aid users: Common factors in quiet and noise. Miller JD; Watson CS; Leek MR; Dubno JR; Wark DJ; Souza PE; Gordon-Salant S; Ahlstrom JB J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2933. PubMed ID: 28464618 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of SNR, masker type and noise reduction processing on sentence recognition performance and listening effort as indicated by the pupil dilation response. Ohlenforst B; Wendt D; Kramer SE; Naylor G; Zekveld AA; Lunner T Hear Res; 2018 Aug; 365():90-99. PubMed ID: 29779607 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. An algorithm to increase intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in the presence of a competing talker. Healy EW; Delfarah M; Vasko JL; Carter BL; Wang D J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4230. PubMed ID: 28618817 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Large-scale training to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in novel noises. Chen J; Wang Y; Yoho SE; Wang D; Healy EW J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2604. PubMed ID: 27250154 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Assessing the efficacy of hearing-aid amplification using a phoneme test. Scheidiger C; Allen JB; Dau T J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):1739. PubMed ID: 28372055 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of combined dynamic compression and single channel noise reduction for hearing aid applications. Kortlang S; Chen Z; Gerkmann T; Kollmeier B; Hohmann V; Ewert SD Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S43-S54. PubMed ID: 28355947 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Sentence perception in noise by hearing-aid users predicted by syllable-constituent perception and the use of context. Miller JD; Watson CS; Leek MR; Wark DJ; Souza PE; Gordon-Salant S; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Jan; 147(1):273. PubMed ID: 32006979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Psychoacoustic and phoneme identification measures in cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners. Goldsworthy RL; Delhorne LA; Braida LD; Reed CM Trends Amplif; 2013 Mar; 17(1):27-44. PubMed ID: 23429419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. The effects of selective consonant amplification on sentence recognition in noise by hearing-impaired listeners. Saripella R; Loizou PC; Thibodeau L; Alford JA J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):3028-37. PubMed ID: 22087930 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Examination of a hybrid beamformer that preserves auditory spatial cues. Best V; Roverud E; Mason CR; Kidd G J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Oct; 142(4):EL369. PubMed ID: 29092558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Electric and acoustic harmonic integration predicts speech-in-noise performance in hybrid cochlear implant users. Bonnard D; Schwalje A; Gantz B; Choi I Hear Res; 2018 Sep; 367():223-230. PubMed ID: 29980380 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of companding on speech recognition in quiet and noise for listeners with ANSD. Narne VK; Barman A; Deepthi M Int J Audiol; 2014 Feb; 53(2):94-100. PubMed ID: 24237041 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]