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.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
137 related items for PubMed ID: 12353604
1. 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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of presentation level and compression characteristics on sentence recognition in modulated noise. Olsen HL, Olofsson A, Hagerman B. Int J Audiol; 2004 May; 43(5):283-94. PubMed ID: 15357412 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Predicted and measured speech recognition performance in noise with linear amplification. Magnusson L, Karlsson M, Leijon A. Ear Hear; 2001 Feb; 22(1):46-57. PubMed ID: 11271975 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Recognition of digits in different types of noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Smits C, Houtgast T. Int J Audiol; 2007 Mar; 46(3):134-44. PubMed ID: 17365067 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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 23; 18():. PubMed ID: 25421088 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Speech recognition and just-follow-conversation tasks for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners with different maskers. Larsby B, Arlinger S. Audiology; 1994 Nov 23; 33(3):165-76. PubMed ID: 8042937 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of frequency response and aided speech-recognition performance for hearing aids selected by three different prescriptive methods. Humes L, Hackett T. J Am Acad Audiol; 1990 Apr 23; 1(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 2132584 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Speech intelligibility in noisy environments with one- and two-microphone hearing aids. Wouters J, Litière L, van Wieringen A. Audiology; 1999 Apr 23; 38(2):91-8. PubMed ID: 10206518 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Non-flat audiograms in sensorineural hearing loss and speech perception. Andrade KC, Menezes Pde L, Carnaúba AT, Rodrigues RG, Leal Mde C, Pereira LD. Clinics (Sao Paulo); 2013 Jun 23; 68(6):815-9. PubMed ID: 23778471 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Phonological mismatch makes aided speech recognition in noise cognitively taxing. Rudner M, Foo C, Rönnberg J, Lunner T. Ear Hear; 2007 Dec 23; 28(6):879-92. PubMed ID: 17982373 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Boymans M, Dreschler WA. Audiology; 2000 Dec 23; 39(5):260-8. PubMed ID: 11093610 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology. Gravel JS, Fausel N, Liskow C, Chobot J. Ear Hear; 1999 Feb 23; 20(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 10037061 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of the NAL(R) and Cambridge formulae for the fitting of linear hearing aids. Peters RW, Moore BC, Glasberg BR, Stone MA. Br J Audiol; 2000 Feb 23; 34(1):21-36. PubMed ID: 10759075 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Spectral contributions to the benefit from spatial separation of speech and noise. Dubno JR, Ahlstrom JB, Horwitz AR. J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Dec 23; 45(6):1297-310. PubMed ID: 12546495 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]