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 *

102 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 464895)

  • 1. Effects of room reverberation upon hearing aid quality judgments.
    Harris RW; Goldstein DP
    Audiology; 1979; 18(3):253-62. PubMed ID: 464895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Hearing aid quality judgments in reverberant and nonreverberant environments using a magnitude estimation procedure.
    Harris RW; Goldstein DP
    Audiology; 1985; 24(1):32-43. PubMed ID: 3977782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The influence of audiovisual ceiling performance on the relationship between reverberation and directional benefit: perception and prediction.
    Wu YH; Bentler RA
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(5):604-14. PubMed ID: 22677815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Vowel confusions of hearing-impaired listeners under reverberant and nonreverberant conditions.
    Nabelek AK; Letowski TR
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1985 May; 50(2):126-31. PubMed ID: 3990258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Distance and reverberation effects on directional benefit.
    Ricketts TA; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2003 Dec; 24(6):472-84. PubMed ID: 14663347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Multidimensional scaling of quality judgments of speech signals processed by hearing aids.
    Punch JL; Montgomery AA; Schwartz DM; Walden BE; Prosek RA; Howard MT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1980 Aug; 68(2):458-66. PubMed ID: 7419804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation method for hearing aid fitting under reverberation: comparison between monaural and binaural hearing aids.
    Shiraishi K; Inoue M; Yonemoto K; Imamura A
    J Physiol Anthropol Appl Human Sci; 2004 Nov; 23(6):255-8. PubMed ID: 15599071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An exploratory investigation of speech recognition thresholds in noise with auralisations of two reverberant rooms.
    Kuusinen A; Saariniemi E; Sivonen V; Dietz A; Aarnisalo AA; Lokki T
    Int J Audiol; 2021 Mar; 60(3):210-219. PubMed ID: 32964762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of sound quality judgments for monaural and binaural hearing aid processed stimuli.
    Balfour PB; Hawkins DB
    Ear Hear; 1992 Oct; 13(5):331-9. PubMed ID: 1487093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of room reverberation and noise on speech discrimination by the elderly.
    Harris RW; Reitz ML
    Audiology; 1985; 24(5):319-24. PubMed ID: 4051881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. On a reference-free speech quality estimator for hearing aids.
    Suelzle D; Parsa V; Falk TH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):EL412-8. PubMed ID: 23656102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Speech-clarity judgments of hearing-aid-processed speech in noise: differing polar patterns and acoustic environments.
    Amlani AM; Rakerd B; Punch JL
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Jun; 45(6):319-30. PubMed ID: 16777778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children.
    Finitzo-Hieber T; Tillman TW
    J Speech Hear Res; 1978 Sep; 21(3):440-58. PubMed ID: 713515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quality judgments of hearing aid-processed speech and music by normal and otopathologic listeners.
    Punch JL
    J Am Audiol Soc; 1978; 3(4):179-88. PubMed ID: 659290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Preference for and performance with damped and undamped hearing aids by listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Davis LA; Davidson SA
    J Speech Hear Res; 1996 Jun; 39(3):483-93. PubMed ID: 8783128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Performance of an adaptive beamforming noise reduction scheme for hearing aid applications. II. Experimental verification of the predictions.
    Kompis M; Dillier N
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Mar; 109(3):1134-43. PubMed ID: 11303927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Similarities of vowels in nonreverberant and reverberant fields.
    Nábĕlek AK; Letowski TR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1988 May; 83(5):1891-9. PubMed ID: 3403805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Advantages of directional hearing aid microphones related to room acoustics.
    Leeuw AR; Dreschler WA
    Audiology; 1991; 30(6):330-44. PubMed ID: 1772383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An examination of speech reception thresholds measured in a simulated reverberant cafeteria environment.
    Best V; Keidser G; Buchholz JM; Freeston K
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(10):682-90. PubMed ID: 25853616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Paired comparison judgments of relative intelligibility in noise.
    Studebaker GA; Bisset JD; Van Ort DM; Hoffnung SU
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1982 Jul; 72(1):80-92. PubMed ID: 7108046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.