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 *

416 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29782445)

  • 61. Functional status of hearing aids in bilateral-bimodal users.
    Yehudai N; Shpak T; Most T; Luntz M
    Otol Neurotol; 2013 Jun; 34(4):675-81. PubMed ID: 23640089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Does acoustic fundamental frequency information enhance cochlear implant performance?
    Mulhern L; Cullington H
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 Mar; 15(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 24597637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. An analysis of hearing aid fittings in adults using cochlear implants and contralateral hearing aids.
    Harris MS; Hay-McCutcheon M
    Laryngoscope; 2010 Dec; 120(12):2484-8. PubMed ID: 21046545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Exploring the Effects of the Narrative Embodied in the Hearing Aid Fitting Process on Treatment Outcomes.
    Naylor G; Öberg M; Wänström G; Lunner T
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(5):517-26. PubMed ID: 25811932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility.
    Ching TY; Quar TK; Johnson EE; Newall P; Sharma M
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):260-74. PubMed ID: 25751694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Criteria for Selecting an Optimal Device for the Contralateral Ear of Children with a Unilateral Cochlear Implant.
    Jeong SW; Kang MY; Kim LS
    Audiol Neurootol; 2015; 20(5):314-21. PubMed ID: 26277845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Trimodal speech perception: how residual acoustic hearing supplements cochlear-implant consonant recognition in the presence of visual cues.
    Sheffield BM; Schuchman G; Bernstein JG
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):e99-112. PubMed ID: 25514796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Listener Factors Explain Little Variability in Self-Adjusted Hearing Aid Gain.
    Perry TT; Nelson PB; Van Tasell DJ
    Trends Hear; 2019; 23():2331216519837124. PubMed ID: 30880645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Benefits of Bimodal Stimulation.
    van Loon MC; Smits C; Smit CF; Hensen EF; Merkus P
    Otol Neurotol; 2017 Jul; 38(6):e100-e106. PubMed ID: 28441230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Referral rates of postlingually deafened adult hearing aid users for a cochlear implant candidacy assessment.
    Looi V; Bluett C; Boisvert I
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Dec; 56(12):919-925. PubMed ID: 28678547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Effectiveness and efficiency of a dedicated bimodal fitting formula.
    Cuda D; Murri A; Mainardi A; Chalupper J
    Audiol Res; 2019 May; 9(1):219. PubMed ID: 31183024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Monaural and binaural loudness measures in cochlear implant users with contralateral residual hearing.
    Blamey PJ; Dooley GJ; James CJ; Parisi ES
    Ear Hear; 2000 Feb; 21(1):6-17. PubMed ID: 10708069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. The Effect of Binaural Beamforming Technology on Speech Intelligibility in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Vroegop JL; Homans NC; Goedegebure A; Dingemanse JG; van Immerzeel T; van der Schroeff MP
    Audiol Neurootol; 2018; 23(1):32-38. PubMed ID: 29936510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Language and speech perception of young children with bimodal fitting or bilateral cochlear implants.
    Ching TY; Day J; Van Buynder P; Hou S; Zhang V; Seeto M; Burns L; Flynn C
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 May; 15 Suppl 1(0 1):S43-6. PubMed ID: 24869442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Task-Dependent Effects of Signal Audibility for Processing Speech: Comparing Performance With NAL-NL2 and DSL v5 Hearing Aid Prescriptions at Threshold and at Suprathreshold Levels in 9- to 17-Year-Olds With Hearing Loss.
    Pittman AL; Stewart EC
    Trends Hear; 2023; 27():23312165231177509. PubMed ID: 37254534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Comparison of the CAM2A and NAL-NL2 hearing-aid fitting methods for participants with a wide range of hearing losses.
    Moore BC; Sęk A
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55(2):93-100. PubMed ID: 26470732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Restoring Perceived Loudness for Listeners With Hearing Loss.
    Oetting D; Hohmann V; Appell JE; Kollmeier B; Ewert SD
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(4):664-678. PubMed ID: 29210810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Auditory, Visual, and Cognitive Abilities in Normal-Hearing Adults, Hearing Aid Users, and Cochlear Implant Users.
    Ceuleers D; Keppler H; Degeest S; Baudonck N; Swinnen F; Kestens K; Dhooge I
    Ear Hear; 2024 May-Jun 01; 45(3):679-694. PubMed ID: 38192017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. From hearing with a cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid (CI/HA) to hearing with two cochlear implants (CI/CI): a within-subject design comparison.
    Luntz M; Egra-Dagan D; Attias J; Yehudai N; Most T; Shpak T
    Otol Neurotol; 2014 Dec; 35(10):1682-90. PubMed ID: 25275862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Transitioning hearing aid users with severe and profound loss to a new gain/frequency response: benefit, perception, and acceptance.
    Convery E; Keidser G
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Mar; 22(3):168-80. PubMed ID: 21545769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.