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 *

165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37942535)

  • 41. 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]  

  • 42. 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]  

  • 43. Acclimatization to hearing aids.
    Dawes P; Munro KJ; Kalluri S; Edwards B
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(2):203-12. PubMed ID: 24351612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Using trainable hearing aids to examine real-world preferred gain.
    Mueller HG; Hornsby BW; Weber JE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2008; 19(10):758-73. PubMed ID: 19358456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Validation of a Self-Fitting Method for Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids.
    Sabin AT; Van Tasell DJ; Rabinowitz B; Dhar S
    Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216519900589. PubMed ID: 32003285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. A Patient-Centered, Provider-Facilitated Approach to the Refinement of Nonlinear Frequency Compression Parameters Based on Subjective Preference Ratings of Amplified Sound Quality.
    Johnson EE; Light KC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Sep; 26(8):689-702. PubMed ID: 26333877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. Determination of preferred parameters for multichannel compression using individually fitted simulated hearing AIDS and paired comparisons.
    Moore BC; Füllgrabe C; Stone MA
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):556-68. PubMed ID: 21285878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Evaluation of the CAMEQ2-HF method for fitting hearing aids with multichannel amplitude compression.
    Moore BC; Füllgrabe C
    Ear Hear; 2010 Oct; 31(5):657-66. PubMed ID: 20526199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. 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]  

  • 51. [Effectiveness of hearing aid provision for severe hearing loss].
    Engler M; Digeser F; Hoppe U
    HNO; 2022 Jul; 70(7):520-532. PubMed ID: 35061063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Fitting recommendations and clinical benefit associated with use of the NAL-NL2 hearing-aid prescription in Nucleus cochlear implant recipients.
    English R; Plant K; Maciejczyk M; Cowan R
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 2():S45-50. PubMed ID: 26853233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Verification of in situ thresholds and integrated real-ear measurements.
    Digiovanni JJ; Pratt RM
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2010; 21(10):663-70. PubMed ID: 21376007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Effect of Hearing Aid Technology Level on New Hearing Aid Users.
    Hausladen J; Plyler PN; Clausen B; Fincher A; Norris S; Russell T
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2022 Mar; 33(3):149-157. PubMed ID: 34670289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Outcomes of Hearing Aid Use by Individuals with Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss (USNHL).
    Bishop CE; Hamadain E; Galster JA; Johnson MF; Spankovich C; Windmill I
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017; 28(10):941-949. PubMed ID: 29130442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. A "Goldilocks" Approach to Hearing Aid Self-Fitting: Ear-Canal Output and Speech Intelligibility Index.
    Mackersie C; Boothroyd A; Lithgow A
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):107-115. PubMed ID: 29894379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Consistency of Hearing Aid Setting Preference in Simulated Real-World Environments: Implications for Trainable Hearing Aids.
    Walravens E; Keidser G; Hickson L
    Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520933392. PubMed ID: 32602407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. Sound quality judgements of new hearing instrument users over a 24-week post-fitting period.
    Munro KJ; Lutman ME
    Int J Audiol; 2005 Feb; 44(2):92-101. PubMed ID: 15913157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Experiments with classroom FM amplification.
    Boothroyd A; Iglehart F
    Ear Hear; 1998 Jun; 19(3):202-17. PubMed ID: 9657595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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