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.
123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8219296)
1. Role of perceptual acclimatization in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids. Gatehouse S J Am Acad Audiol; 1993 Sep; 4(5):296-306. PubMed ID: 8219296 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Acceptable noise level (ANL) with Danish and non-semantic speech materials in adult hearing-aid users. Olsen SØ; Lantz J; Nielsen LH; Brännström KJ Int J Audiol; 2012 Sep; 51(9):678-88. PubMed ID: 22731922 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Benefits of Nonlinear Frequency Compression in Adult Hearing Aid Users. Kokx-Ryan M; Cohen J; Cord MT; Walden TC; Makashay MJ; Sheffield BM; Brungart DS J Am Acad Audiol; 2015; 26(10):838-55. PubMed ID: 26554489 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The relationship between high-frequency pure-tone hearing loss, hearing in noise test (HINT) thresholds, and the articulation index. Vermiglio AJ; Soli SD; Freed DJ; Fisher LM J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(10):779-88. PubMed ID: 23169195 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. Gatehouse S J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Sep; 92(3):1258-68. PubMed ID: 1401514 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users. Ng EH; Rudner M; Lunner T; Pedersen MS; Rönnberg J Int J Audiol; 2013 Jul; 52(7):433-41. PubMed ID: 23550584 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. The effect of speech presentation level on measurement of auditory acclimatization to amplified speech. Munro KJ; Lutman ME J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Jul; 114(1):484-95. PubMed ID: 12880059 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Transitioning hearing aid users with severe and profound loss to a new gain/frequency response: benefit, perception, and acceptance. Convery E; Keidser G J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Mar; 22(3):168-80. PubMed ID: 21545769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Dynamic relation between working memory capacity and speech recognition in noise during the first 6 months of hearing aid use. Ng EH; Classon E; Larsby B; Arlinger S; Lunner T; Rudner M; Rönnberg J Trends Hear; 2014 Nov; 18():. PubMed ID: 25421088 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Benefit from, and acclimatization to, frequency compression hearing aids in experienced adult hearing-aid users. Ellis RJ; Munro KJ Int J Audiol; 2015 Jan; 54(1):37-47. PubMed ID: 25470620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The effect of tone-vocoding on spatial release from masking for old, hearing-impaired listeners. King A; Hopkins K; Plack CJ; Pontoppidan NH; Bramsløw L; Hietkamp RK; Vatti M; Hafez A J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2591. PubMed ID: 28464637 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm. Fink N; Furst M; Muchnik C J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1718-31. PubMed ID: 22978899 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Personal amplification for school-age children with auditory processing disorders. Kuk F; Jackson A; Keenan D; Lau CC J Am Acad Audiol; 2008 Jun; 19(6):465-80. PubMed ID: 19253780 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Communicative ability in an audiological perspective. Theory and application to post-secondary school students. Borg E; Samuelsson E; Danermark B; Rönnberg J Scand Audiol Suppl; 1999; 50():i-iv, 1-36. PubMed ID: 10810771 [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. 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]
20. Evaluation of real-world preferences and performance of hearing aids fitted according to the NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 procedures in children with moderately severe to profound hearing loss. Quar TK; Ching TY; Newall P; Sharma M Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):322-32. PubMed ID: 23570290 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]