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 *

291 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7187908)

  • 1. Effects of extended-range frequency-response amplification in hearing aids.
    Forrester JI; Raffin MJ
    J Aud Res; 1982 Jan; 22(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 7187908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of stimulus level on the speech perception abilities of children using cochlear implants or digital hearing aids.
    Davidson LS
    Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):493-507. PubMed ID: 16957500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of prolonged lack of amplification on speech-recognition performance: preliminary findings.
    Silman S; Silverman CA; Emmer MB; Gelfand SA
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993; 30(3):326-32. PubMed ID: 8126657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The efficacy of a multichannel hearing aid in which the gain is controlled by the minima in the temporal signal envelope.
    Festen JM; van Dijkhuizen JN; Plomp R
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993; 38():101-10. PubMed ID: 8153556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Speech recognition threshold in noise: effects of hearing loss, frequency response, and speech materials.
    Van Tasell DJ; Yanz JL
    J Speech Hear Res; 1987 Sep; 30(3):377-86. PubMed ID: 3669644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study.
    Morera C; Manrique M; Ramos A; Garcia-Ibanez L; Cavalle L; Huarte A; Castillo C; Estrada E
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jun; 125(6):596-606. PubMed ID: 16076708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears.
    Mok M; Grayden D; Dowell RC; Lawrence D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):338-51. PubMed ID: 16671848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Hearing aid evaluation: predicting speech gain from insertion gain.
    Dillon H
    J Speech Hear Res; 1993 Jun; 36(3):621-33. PubMed ID: 8331918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Use of the California Consonant Test in evaluating hearing aids.
    Edgerton BJ; Danhauer JL; Simmons FJ
    Am J Otol; 1986 Mar; 7(2):104-9. PubMed ID: 3963153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Speech reception thresholds using conventional vs high-frequency spondees in normals and in subjects with marked high-frequency sensorineural loss.
    Martin FN; Jansen RM
    J Aud Res; 1985 Apr; 25(2):133-42. PubMed ID: 3842138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Speech audiometry with logatomes].
    Welge-Lüssen A; Hauser R; Erdmann J; Schwob C; Probst R
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1997 Feb; 76(2):57-64. PubMed ID: 9172631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid.
    Plomp R; Duquesnoy AJ
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1982; 15():95-111. PubMed ID: 6955931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Population study of the ability to benefit from amplification and the provision of a hearing aid in 55-74-year-old first-time hearing aid users.
    Davis A
    Int J Audiol; 2003 Jul; 42 Suppl 2():2S39-52. PubMed ID: 12918628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Rehabilitation plasticity: influence of hearing aid fitting on frequency discrimination performance near the hearing-loss cut-off.
    Gabriel D; Veuillet E; Vesson JF; Collet L
    Hear Res; 2006 Mar; 213(1-2):49-57. PubMed ID: 16459036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Intelligibility of speech in noise at high presentation levels: effects of hearing loss and frequency region.
    Summers V; Cord MT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Aug; 122(2):1130-7. PubMed ID: 17672659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Children's speech recognition scores: the Speech Intelligibility Index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level.
    Scollie SD
    Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):543-56. PubMed ID: 18469717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech discrimination and effectiveness of hearing aids under listening conditions similar to those of a transit operator.
    Lee LA; Chung DY; Gannon RP
    J Otolaryngol; 1981 Jun; 10(3):237-44. PubMed ID: 7277564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comfortable loudness levels for speech: effects of signal-to-noise ratios and instructions.
    Beattie RC; Himes BE
    J Aud Res; 1984 Jul; 24(3):213-29. PubMed ID: 6545540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.