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

133 related items for PubMed ID: 16149238

  • 21. [Hearing Loss and Speech Recognition in the Elderly].
    von Gablenz P, Holube I.
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2017 Nov; 96(11):759-764. PubMed ID: 29132188
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. 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]

  • 23. Hearing in Noise Test, HINT-Brazil, in normal-hearing children.
    Novelli CL, Carvalho NG, Colella-Santos MF.
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Mar; 84(3):360-367. PubMed ID: 28549874
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. 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; 45(6):1297-310. PubMed ID: 12546495
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Relative contributions of auditory and cognitive functions on speech recognition in quiet and in noise among older adults.
    Mukari SZMS, Yusof Y, Ishak WS, Maamor N, Chellapan K, Dzulkifli MA.
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2020 Dec; 86(2):149-156. PubMed ID: 30558985
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. The influence of semantically related and unrelated text cues on the intelligibility of sentences in noise.
    Zekveld AA, Rudner M, Johnsrude IS, Festen JM, van Beek JH, Rönnberg J.
    Ear Hear; 2011 Dec; 32(6):e16-25. PubMed ID: 21826004
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. Speech Recognition in Noise Using Binaural Diotic and Antiphasic Digits-in-Noise in Children: Maturation and Self-Test Validity.
    Wolmarans J, De Sousa KC, Frisby C, Mahomed-Asmail F, Smits C, Moore DR, Swanepoel W.
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 May; 32(5):315-323. PubMed ID: 34375996
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test.
    Zokoll MA, Fidan D, Türkyılmaz D, Hochmuth S, Ergenç İ, Sennaroğlu G, Kollmeier B.
    Int J Audiol; 2015 May; 54 Suppl 2():51-61. PubMed ID: 26443486
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. School-Age Hearing Screening Based on Speech-in-Noise Perception Using the Digit Triplet Test.
    Denys S, Hofmann M, Luts H, Guérin C, Keymeulen A, Van Hoeck K, van Wieringen A, Hoppenbrouwers K, Wouters J.
    Ear Hear; 2018 May; 39(6):1104-1115. PubMed ID: 29557793
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Pediatric normative data for a novel and fast speech perception test in noise.
    Gambacorta V, Stivalini D, Faralli M, Lapenna R, Della Volpe A, Malerba P, Di Nardo W, Di Cesare T, Orzan E, Ricci G.
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2024 May; 180():111928. PubMed ID: 38593717
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Speech audiometry in noise: SNR Loss per age-group in normal hearing subjects.
    Decambron M, Leclercq F, Renard C, Vincent C.
    Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis; 2022 Mar; 139(2):61-64. PubMed ID: 34175252
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise.
    Smits C, Festen JM.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):3004-15. PubMed ID: 23654404
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. Development of the Farsi Hearing in Noise Test.
    Darouie A, Zamiri Abdollahi F, Joulaie M, Nik Nezhad S, Ahmadi T, Soli S.
    Int J Audiol; 2020 Feb; 59(2):148-152. PubMed ID: 31560226
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. Estimates of basilar-membrane nonlinearity effects on masking of tones and speech.
    Dubno JR, Horwitz AR, Ahlstrom JB.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Feb; 28(1):2-17. PubMed ID: 17204895
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels.
    Studebaker GA, Sherbecoe RL, McDaniel DM, Gwaltney CA.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Apr; 105(4):2431-44. PubMed ID: 10212424
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. The digits-in-noise test: assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise.
    Smits C, Theo Goverts S, Festen JM.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1693-706. PubMed ID: 23464039
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. The pure-tone hearing thresholds of otologically healthy 14-year-old children.
    Rahko-Laitila P, Karma P, Laippala P, Salmelin R, Sipilä M, Manninen M, Rahko T.
    Audiology; 2001 Mar; 40(4):171-7. PubMed ID: 11521708
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test.
    Warzybok A, Zokoll M, Wardenga N, Ozimek E, Boboshko M, Kollmeier B.
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Mar; 54 Suppl 2():35-43. PubMed ID: 25843088
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Estimating noise-induced permanent threshold shift from audiometric shape: the ISO-1999 model.
    Dobie RA.
    Ear Hear; 2005 Dec; 26(6):630-5. PubMed ID: 16377998
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. The Just-Meaningful Difference in Speech-to-Noise Ratio.
    McShefferty D, Whitmer WM, Akeroyd MA.
    Trends Hear; 2016 Feb 01; 20():. PubMed ID: 26834121
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 7.