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 *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 496725)

  • 1. Speech perception processes and fitting of hearing aids.
    Barfod J
    Audiology; 1979; 18(5):430-41. PubMed ID: 496725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Influence of hearing aids on monosyllabic test score and subjective everyday hearing].
    Thümmler R; Liebscher T; Hoppe U
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):595-600. PubMed ID: 27126291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Evaluation of hearing aid rehabilitation using the Freiburg Monosyllabic Test].
    Hoppe U
    HNO; 2016 Aug; 64(8):589-94. PubMed ID: 27299893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech perception, hearing aid technology, and aural rehabilitation: a future perspective.
    Henoch MA
    Ear Hear; 1991 Dec; 12(6 Suppl):187S-191S. PubMed ID: 1794645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Prediction of benefit from linear hearing aids in nonreverberant listening environments.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC
    Ear Hear; 1993 Aug; 14(4):275-84. PubMed ID: 8405731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Speech audiometry for indication of conventional and implantable hearing aids].
    Hoppe U; Hast A
    HNO; 2017 Mar; 65(3):195-202. PubMed ID: 27921115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Maximizing effective audibility in hearing aid fitting.
    Ching TY; Dillon H; Katsch R; Byrne D
    Ear Hear; 2001 Jun; 22(3):212-24. PubMed ID: 11409857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of calculated, measured and self-assessed intelligibility of speech in noise for hearing-aid users.
    Magnusson L; Karlsson M; Ringdahl A; Israelsson B
    Scand Audiol; 2001; 30(3):160-71. PubMed ID: 11683454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. [Recognition function for the Freiburg monosyllabic test in noise with a signal to noise ratio (SNR) of 5 dB].
    Guy S; Schönweiler R; Wollenberg B; Zehlicke T; Pohl M; Löhler J
    HNO; 2020 Oct; 68(10):773-779. PubMed ID: 32390058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Acoustic and perceptual effects of magnifying interaural difference cues in a simulated "binaural" hearing aid.
    de Taillez T; Grimm G; Kollmeier B; Neher T
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S81-S91. PubMed ID: 28395561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Performance with an adaptive frequency response hearing aid in a sample of elderly hearing-impaired listeners.
    Gordon-Salant S; Sherlock LP
    Ear Hear; 1992 Aug; 13(4):255-62. PubMed ID: 1397768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Decision making in rehabilitative audiology.
    McCarthy PA; Montgomery AA; Mueller HG
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1990 Jan; 1(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 2132578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Fitting hearing aids to individual loudness-perception measures.
    Ricketts TA
    Ear Hear; 1996 Apr; 17(2):124-32. PubMed ID: 8698159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Hearing aid fitting and developmental outcomes of children fit according to either the NAL or DSL prescription: fit-to-target, audibility, speech and language abilities.
    Ching TYC; Zhang VW; Johnson EE; Van Buynder P; Hou S; Burns L; Button L; Flynn C; McGhie K
    Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(sup2):S41-S54. PubMed ID: 28971727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Effect of venting the ear mold on speech discrimination in masking noise].
    Brügel FJ; Schorn K; Fastl H
    HNO; 1991 Sep; 39(9):356-61. PubMed ID: 1748579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. How directional microphones affect speech recognition, listening effort and localisation for listeners with moderate-to-severe hearing loss.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Dec; 56(12):909-918. PubMed ID: 28738747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quality ratings for frequency-shaped peak-clipped speech: results for listeners with hearing loss.
    Kozma-Spytek L; Kates JM; Revoile SG
    J Speech Hear Res; 1996 Dec; 39(6):1115-23. PubMed ID: 8959597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of an articulation-index based model for predicting the effects of adaptive frequency response hearing aids.
    Fabry DA; Van Tasell DJ
    J Speech Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 33(4):676-89. PubMed ID: 2273883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.