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 *

143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29289077)

  • 1. Evaluating hearing aid amplification using idiosyncratic consonant errors.
    Abavisani A; Allen JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Dec; 142(6):3736. PubMed ID: 29289077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Auditory training of speech recognition with interrupted and continuous noise maskers by children with hearing impairment.
    Sullivan JR; Thibodeau LM; Assmann PF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):495-501. PubMed ID: 23297921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. The relative importance of consonant and vowel segments to the recognition of words and sentences: effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Kewley-Port D; Humes LE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1667-78. PubMed ID: 22978895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Audiologist-driven versus patient-driven fine tuning of hearing instruments.
    Boymans M; Dreschler WA
    Trends Amplif; 2012 Mar; 16(1):49-58. PubMed ID: 22143874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Improving speech-in-noise recognition for children with hearing loss: potential effects of language abilities, binaural summation, and head shadow.
    Nittrouer S; Caldwell-Tarr A; Tarr E; Lowenstein JH; Rice C; Moberly AC
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Aug; 52(8):513-25. PubMed ID: 23834373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. On a reference-free speech quality estimator for hearing aids.
    Suelzle D; Parsa V; Falk TH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):EL412-8. PubMed ID: 23656102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Multichannel compression hearing aids: effect of channel bandwidth on consonant and vowel identification by hearing-impaired listeners.
    Strelcyk O; Li N; Rodriguez J; Kalluri S; Edwards B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1598-606. PubMed ID: 23464029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T; Wagener KC; Latzel M
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.