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 *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9063560)

  • 1. Audiovisual speech reception in noise and self-perceived hearing disability in sensorineural hearing loss.
    Corthals P; Vinck B; De Vel E; Van Cauwenberge P
    Audiology; 1997; 36(1):46-56. PubMed ID: 9063560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Speech reception in quiet and in noisy conditions by individuals with noise-induced hearing loss in relation to their tone audiogram.
    Smoorenburg GF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Jan; 91(1):421-37. PubMed ID: 1737889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Integrating the acoustics of running speech into the pure tone audiogram: a step from audibility to intelligibility and disability.
    Corthals P
    Folia Phoniatr Logop; 2008; 60(1):25-32. PubMed ID: 18057908
    [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. Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners.
    George EL; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Goverts ST; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Apr; 121(4):2362-75. PubMed ID: 17471748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Pure tone audiograms from hearing-impaired children. II. Predicting speech-hearing from the audiogram.
    Bamford JM; Wilson IM; Atkinson D; Bench J
    Br J Audiol; 1981 Feb; 15(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 7214068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cognitive abilities relate to self-reported hearing disability.
    Zekveld AA; George EL; Houtgast T; Kramer SE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Oct; 56(5):1364-72. PubMed ID: 23838985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Masking effects and tinnitus as explanatory variables in hearing disability.
    Corthals P; Vinck B; De Vel E; Van Cauwenberge P
    Scand Audiol; 1998; 27(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 9505289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of hearing thresholds obtained using pure-tone behavioral audiometry, the Cantonese Hearing in Noise Test (CHINT) and cortical evoked response audiometry.
    Wong LL; Cheung C; Wong EC
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2008 Jun; 128(6):654-60. PubMed ID: 18568500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Audiovisual asynchrony detection and speech intelligibility in noise with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing impairment.
    Başkent D; Bazo D
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 21389856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Speech-in-Noise Assessment in the Routine Audiologic Test Battery: Relationship to Perceived Auditory Disability.
    Fitzgerald MB; Ward KM; Gianakas SP; Smith ML; Blevins NH; Swanson AP
    Ear Hear; 2024 Jul-Aug 01; 45(4):816-826. PubMed ID: 38414136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of expansion algorithms on speech reception thresholds.
    Wise CL; Zakis JA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2008 Feb; 19(2):147-57. PubMed ID: 18669128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. I. Age and lateral asymmetry effects.
    Divenyi PL; Haupt KM
    Ear Hear; 1997 Feb; 18(1):42-61. PubMed ID: 9058037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech perception in noise.
    MacLeod A; Summerfield Q
    Br J Audiol; 1987 May; 21(2):131-41. PubMed ID: 3594015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Audiovisual integration and lipreading abilities of older adults with normal and impaired hearing.
    Tye-Murray N; Sommers MS; Spehar B
    Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):656-68. PubMed ID: 17804980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response.
    Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR
    Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17804982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech recognition threshold in slightly and fully modulated noise for hearing-impaired subjects.
    Hagerman B
    Int J Audiol; 2002 Sep; 41(6):321-9. PubMed ID: 12353604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical Assessment of Functional Hearing Deficits: Speech-in-Noise Performance.
    Phatak SA; Brungart DS; Zion DJ; Grant KW
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(2):426-436. PubMed ID: 30134353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing.
    Koelewijn T; Versfeld NJ; Kramer SE
    Hear Res; 2017 Oct; 354():56-63. PubMed ID: 28869841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The influence of hearing and age on speech recognition scores in noise in audiological patients and in the general population.
    Barrenäs ML; Wikström I
    Ear Hear; 2000 Dec; 21(6):569-77. PubMed ID: 11132783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.