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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33899603)

  • 41. Hearing aid microphone location effects on speech discrimination in noise.
    Franks JR; Feth LL; Daniloff RG
    Ear Hear; 1981; 2(6):241-50. PubMed ID: 7308598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Audiological and clinical outcomes of a transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant: Six-month results from a multicentre study.
    den Besten CA; Monksfield P; Bosman A; Skarzynski PH; Green K; Runge C; Wigren S; Blechert JI; Flynn MC; Mylanus EAM; Hol MKS
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2019 Mar; 44(2):144-157. PubMed ID: 30358920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. 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]  

  • 44. Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.
    Keidser G; Grant F
    Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):501-15. PubMed ID: 11770672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Predictors of Hearing-Aid Outcomes.
    Lopez-Poveda EA; Johannesen PT; Pérez-González P; Blanco JL; Kalluri S; Edwards B
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517730526. PubMed ID: 28929903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. The effects of receiver placement on probe microphone, performance, and subjective measures with open canal hearing instruments.
    Alworth LN; Plyler PN; Reber MB; Johnstone PM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2010 Apr; 21(4):249-66. PubMed ID: 20388451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Comparison of personal sound amplification products and conventional hearing aids for patients with hearing loss: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
    Chen CH; Huang CY; Cheng HL; Lin HH; Chu YC; Chang CY; Lai YH; Wang MC; Cheng YF
    EClinicalMedicine; 2022 Apr; 46():101378. PubMed ID: 35434580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Single-Sided Deafness-Outcomes of Three Interventions for Profound Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Fogels J; Jönsson R; Sadeghi A; Flynn M; Flynn T
    Otol Neurotol; 2020 Jul; 41(6):736-744. PubMed ID: 32574478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Preserved acoustic hearing in cochlear implantation improves speech perception.
    Sheffield SW; Jahn K; Gifford RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Feb; 26(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 25690775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. 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]  

  • 51. Adaptive noise suppression for a dual-microphone hearing aid.
    Wouters J; Berghe JV; Maj JB
    Int J Audiol; 2002 Oct; 41(7):401-7. PubMed ID: 12403608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Effects of Training on the Use of a Manual Microphone Shutoff on a BiCROS Device.
    Kuk F; Seper E; Lau C; Crose B; Korhonen P
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 May; 26(5):478-493. PubMed ID: 26055837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The effect of a carrier phrase on hearing aid amplification of single words in quiet.
    Versfeld NJ; Goverts ST
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Mar; 52(3):189-93. PubMed ID: 23153251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness: speech in noise and directional hearing effects with bone-anchored hearing and contralateral routing of signal amplification.
    Lin LM; Bowditch S; Anderson MJ; May B; Cox KM; Niparko JK
    Otol Neurotol; 2006 Feb; 27(2):172-82. PubMed ID: 16436986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Effects of multi-channel compression time constants on subjectively perceived sound quality and speech intelligibility.
    Hansen M
    Ear Hear; 2002 Aug; 23(4):369-80. PubMed ID: 12195179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. 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]  

  • 57. Evaluation of a Remote Microphone System with Tri-Microphone Beamformer.
    Wolfe J; Duke M; Schafer E; Jones C; Rakita L; Battles J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 Jan; 31(1):50-60. PubMed ID: 31429403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. Expectations, prefitting counseling, and hearing aid outcome.
    Saunders GH; Lewis MS; Forsline A
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2009 May; 20(5):320-34. PubMed ID: 19585963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Efficacy of linear frequency transposition on consonant identification in quiet and in noise.
    Kuk F; Keenan D; Korhonen P; Lau CC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2009 Sep; 20(8):465-79. PubMed ID: 19764167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.