77 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 977431)
1. Modified rhyme test and synthetic sentence identification test scores of normal and hearing-impaired subjects listening in multitalker noise.
Miner R; Danhauer JL
J Am Audiol Soc; 1976; 2(2):61-7. PubMed ID: 977431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Timbre discrimination in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners under different noise conditions.
Emiroglu S; Kollmeier B
Brain Res; 2008 Jul; 1220():199-207. PubMed ID: 17991457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry.
Hagerman B
Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Speech and language development in a population of Swedish hearing-impaired pre-school children, a cross-sectional study.
Borg E; Edquist G; Reinholdson AC; Risberg A; McAllister B
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2007 Jul; 71(7):1061-77. PubMed ID: 17512613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Methods for assessing high frequency hearing loss in every-day listening situations.
Aniansson G
Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1974; 320():1-50. PubMed ID: 4532460
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Thresholds of aural overload, word discrimination in noise, and the "fragile ear".
Humes LE; Bess FH; Schwartz DM
J Am Audiol Soc; 1978; 3(6):253-7. PubMed ID: 681197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Audibility-index predictions of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the connected speech test.
Sherbecoe RL; Studebaker GA
Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1):71-88. PubMed ID: 12598814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Using genetic algorithms with subjective input from human subjects: implications for fitting hearing aids and cochlear implants.
Başkent D; Eiler CL; Edwards B
Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):370-80. PubMed ID: 17485986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. [Discrimination and critical signal to noise ratio of normal and pathological hearing (author's transl)].
von Wedel H
Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg); 1977 Feb; 56(2):180-6. PubMed ID: 139521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Synthetic sentence identification as a function of the age of the listener.
Orchik DJ; Burgess J
J Am Audiol Soc; 1977; 3(1):42-6. PubMed ID: 893200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Consonant identification in quiet and in noise with the normal and the sensorineural hearing-impaired.
Givens GD; Jacobs-Condit L
J Aud Res; 1981 Oct; 21(4):279-85. PubMed ID: 7186504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact of low-frequency hearing.
Büchner A; Schüssler M; Battmer RD; Stöver T; Lesinski-Schiedat A; Lenarz T
Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14 Suppl 1():8-13. PubMed ID: 19390170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Auditory steady-state responses to MM and exponential envelope AM(2)/FM stimuli in normal-hearing adults.
D'haenens W; Dhooge I; De Vel E; Maes L; Bockstael A; Vinck BM
Int J Audiol; 2007 Aug; 46(8):399-406. PubMed ID: 17654081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The effect of the base line response on self-adjustments of hearing aid gain.
Keidser G; Dillon H; Convery E
J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Sep; 124(3):1668-81. PubMed ID: 19045657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions: hit and false-positive rates in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects.
Musiek FE; Baran JA
Am J Otol; 1997 Jul; 18(4):454-61. PubMed ID: 9233485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Phonological mismatch makes aided speech recognition in noise cognitively taxing.
Rudner M; Foo C; Rönnberg J; Lunner T
Ear Hear; 2007 Dec; 28(6):879-92. PubMed ID: 17982373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [The reaction time as a source of error in threshold audiometry (author's transl)].
Kiessling J
HNO; 1977 Oct; 25(10):353-7. PubMed ID: 914662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Performance of normal-hearing listeners on the time-compressed modified rhyme test.
Schwartz DM; Mikus B
J Am Audiol Soc; 1977; 3(1):14-9. PubMed ID: 893195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
