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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33003882)

  • 1. Improving hearing-aid gains based on automatic speech recognition.
    Fontan L; Le Coz M; Azzopardi C; Stone MA; Füllgrabe C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Sep; 148(3):EL227. PubMed ID: 33003882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Using Automatic Speech Recognition to Optimize Hearing-Aid Time Constants.
    Fontan L; Gonçalves Braz L; Pinquier J; Stone MA; Füllgrabe C
    Front Neurosci; 2022; 16():779062. PubMed ID: 35368250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. OPRA-RS: A Hearing-Aid Fitting Method Based on Automatic Speech Recognition and Random Search.
    Gonçalves Braz L; Fontan L; Pinquier J; Stone MA; Füllgrabe C
    Front Neurosci; 2022; 16():779048. PubMed ID: 35264922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech intelligibility benefits of hearing AIDS at various input levels.
    Kuk F; Lau CC; Korhonen P; Crose B
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):275-88. PubMed ID: 25751695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An initial-fit comparison of two generic hearing aid prescriptive methods (NAL-NL2 and CAM2) to individuals having mild to moderately severe high-frequency hearing loss.
    Johnson EE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Feb; 24(2):138-50. PubMed ID: 23357807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Understanding Variability in Individual Response to Hearing Aid Signal Processing in Wearable Hearing Aids.
    Souza P; Arehart K; Schoof T; Anderson M; Strori D; Balmert L
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(6):1280-1292. PubMed ID: 30998547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of speech intelligibility and subjective quality with hearing-aid processing in older adults with hearing loss.
    Arehart KH; Chon SH; Lundberg EMH; Harvey LO; Kates JM; Anderson MC; Rallapalli VH; Souza PE
    Int J Audiol; 2022 Jan; 61(1):46-58. PubMed ID: 33913795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss.
    Seeto A; Searchfield GD
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Mar; 29(3):243-254. PubMed ID: 29488874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Investigating the Effects of Four Auditory Profiles on Speech Recognition, Overall Quality, and Noise Annoyance With Simulated Hearing-Aid Processing Strategies.
    Wu M; Sanchez-Lopez R; El-Haj-Ali M; Nielsen SG; Fereczkowski M; Dau T; Santurette S; Neher T
    Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520960861. PubMed ID: 33073727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. The Effects of Manufacturer's Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss.
    Quar TK; Umat C; Chew YY
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 May; 30(5):346-356. PubMed ID: 30461383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of the CAM2 and NAL-NL2 hearing aid fitting methods.
    Moore BC; Sęk A
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):83-95. PubMed ID: 22878351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Automatic Speech Recognition Predicts Speech Intelligibility and Comprehension for Listeners With Simulated Age-Related Hearing Loss.
    Fontan L; Ferrané I; Farinas J; Pinquier J; Tardieu J; Magnen C; Gaillard P; Aumont X; Füllgrabe C
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 60(9):2394-2405. PubMed ID: 28793162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Evaluation of the sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm in normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
    Sang J; Hu H; Zheng C; Li G; Lutman ME; Bleeck S
    Hear Res; 2014 Apr; 310():36-47. PubMed ID: 24495441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Subjective and objective effects of fast and slow compression on the perception of reverberant speech in listeners with hearing loss.
    Shi LF; Doherty KA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 51(5):1328-40. PubMed ID: 18664685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids.
    Stelmachowicz PG; Dalzell S; Peterson D; Kopun J; Lewis DL; Hoover BE
    Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 9562535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.