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 *

204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34184946)

  • 1. Influence of Three Auditory Profiles on Aided Speech Perception in Different Noise Scenarios.
    Wu M; Cañete OM; Schmidt JH; Fereczkowski M; Neher T
    Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211023709. PubMed ID: 34184946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Revisiting Auditory Profiling: Can Cognitive Factors Improve the Prediction of Aided Speech-in-Noise Outcome?
    Wu M; Christiansen S; Fereczkowski M; Neher T
    Trends Hear; 2022; 26():23312165221113889. PubMed ID: 35942807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Auditory Distraction and Acclimatization to Hearing Aids.
    Dawes P; Munro KJ
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):174-183. PubMed ID: 27564230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of hearing aid settings for electric-acoustic stimulation.
    Dillon MT; Buss E; Pillsbury HC; Adunka OF; Buchman CA; Adunka MC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Feb; 25(2):133-40. PubMed ID: 24828214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Speech Perception in Noise and Listening Effort of Older Adults With Nonlinear Frequency Compression Hearing Aids.
    Shehorn J; Marrone N; Muller T
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):215-225. PubMed ID: 28806193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of LACE DVD training in new and experienced hearing aid users.
    Olson AD; Preminger JE; Shinn JB
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Mar; 24(3):214-30. PubMed ID: 23506666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Pitch and lexical tone perception of bilingual English-Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant recipients, hearing aid users, and normally hearing listeners.
    Looi V; Teo ER; Loo J
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Sep; 16 Suppl 3():S91-S104. PubMed ID: 26561892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessing speech recognition abilities with digits in noise in cochlear implant and hearing aid users.
    Kaandorp MW; Smits C; Merkus P; Goverts ST; Festen JM
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jan; 54(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 25156097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Directional Processing and Noise Reduction in Hearing Aids: Individual and Situational Influences on Preferred Setting.
    Neher T; Wagener KC; Fischer RL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Sep; 27(8):628-46. PubMed ID: 27564441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinical Assessment of Functional Hearing Deficits: Speech-in-Noise Performance.
    Phatak SA; Brungart DS; Zion DJ; Grant KW
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(2):426-436. PubMed ID: 30134353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression for school-age children with moderate to moderately severe hearing loss.
    Wolfe J; John A; Schafer E; Nyffeler M; Boretzki M; Caraway T
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2010; 21(10):618-28. PubMed ID: 21376003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Effects of Hearing Aid Directional Microphone and Noise Reduction Processing on Listening Effort in Older Adults with Hearing Loss.
    Desjardins JL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Jan; 27(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 26809324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Strategies of hearing aids fitting for improving speech recognition in noisy environments].
    Boboshko MY; Berdnikova IP; Korotkov YV; Maltseva NV
    Vestn Otorinolaringol; 2021; 86(2):28-32. PubMed ID: 33929148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fundamental frequency information for speech recognition via bimodal stimulation: cochlear implant in one ear and hearing aid in the other.
    Shpak T; Most T; Luntz M
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(1):97-109. PubMed ID: 24141594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sound Localization and Speech Perception in Noise of Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients: Bimodal Fitting Versus Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
    Choi JE; Moon IJ; Kim EY; Park HS; Kim BK; Chung WH; Cho YS; Brown CJ; Hong SH
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(4):426-440. PubMed ID: 28085740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Preimplant Hearing Aid Fittings and Aided Audibility for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Nickerson A; Davidson LS; Uchanski RM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 Sep; 30(8):703-711. PubMed ID: 31044697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of hearing aid frequency response fittings in pediatric and young adult bimodal recipients.
    Davidson LS; Firszt JB; Brenner C; Cadieux JH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Apr; 26(4):393-407. PubMed ID: 25879243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of presentation level on normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners' acceptable speech and noise levels.
    Recker KL; Edwards BW
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Jan; 24(1):17-25. PubMed ID: 23231813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.