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.
5. Speech recognition threshold in noise: effects of hearing loss, frequency response, and speech materials. Van Tasell DJ; Yanz JL J Speech Hear Res; 1987 Sep; 30(3):377-86. PubMed ID: 3669644 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Speech-reception threshold in noise for hearing-impaired listeners in conditions with a varying amplitude-frequency response. van Dijkhuizen JN; Festen JM; Plomp R Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():202-6. PubMed ID: 2356728 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Aspects of auditory speech perception in cochlear implant and hearing aid managed children]. Junge FM; Dahm MC; Braun O Wien Med Wochenschr; 1997; 147(10):255-8. PubMed ID: 9324868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparison of two-channel and single-channel compression hearing aids. Moore BC; Glasberg BR Audiology; 1986; 25(4-5):210-26. PubMed ID: 3566630 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Speech reception thresholds in noise and self-reported hearing disability in a general adult population. Smits C; Kramer SE; Houtgast T Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):538-49. PubMed ID: 16957503 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effects of prolonged lack of amplification on speech-recognition performance: preliminary findings. Silman S; Silverman CA; Emmer MB; Gelfand SA J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993; 30(3):326-32. PubMed ID: 8126657 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Test-retest variability in testing hearing of speech. Hughes EC; Arthur RH; Johnson RL J Am Aud Soc; 1979; 5(1):17-20. PubMed ID: 511653 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Part- vs full-list performance on the NST by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired adults. Danhauer JL; Brink TJ J Aud Res; 1985 Jul; 25(3):143-8. PubMed ID: 3842838 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinical results with a percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid. Abramson M; Fay TH; Kelly JP; Wazen JJ; Liden G; Tjellstrom A Laryngoscope; 1989 Jul; 99(7 Pt 1):707-10. PubMed ID: 2747393 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Functional benefit of the bone-anchored hearing aid with different auditory profiles: objective and subjective measures. van Wieringen A; De Voecht K; Bosman AJ; Wouters J Clin Otolaryngol; 2011 Apr; 36(2):114-20. PubMed ID: 21414178 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry. Hagerman B Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Extensive hearing loss and deafness in adults]. Laszig R Ther Umsch; 1993 Sep; 50(9):647-52. PubMed ID: 8273025 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. How we do it: The Dutch functional hearing-screening tests by telephone and internet. Smits C; Merkus P; Houtgast T Clin Otolaryngol; 2006 Oct; 31(5):436-40. PubMed ID: 17014457 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners. Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Binaural hearing spectacles with "no mould" by acoustic trauma. Lund O; Høyvik H Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1979; 360():113-5. PubMed ID: 287318 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears. Mok M; Grayden D; Dowell RC; Lawrence D J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):338-51. PubMed ID: 16671848 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]