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

211 related items for PubMed ID: 17118905

  • 1. Frequency-compression outcomes in listeners with steeply sloping audiograms.
    Simpson A, Hersbach AA, McDermott HJ.
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Nov; 45(11):619-29. PubMed ID: 17118905
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Vibrant soundbridge versus conventional hearing aid in sensorineural high-frequency hearing loss: a prospective study.
    Truy E, Philibert B, Vesson JF, Labassi S, Collet L.
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Aug; 29(5):684-7. PubMed ID: 18434928
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Standard cochlear implantation of adults with residual low-frequency hearing: implications for combined electro-acoustic stimulation.
    Novak MA, Black JM, Koch DB.
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):609-14. PubMed ID: 17514064
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Active middle ear implant compared with open-fit hearing aid in sloping high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss.
    Boeheim K, Pok SM, Schloegel M, Filzmoser P.
    Otol Neurotol; 2010 Apr; 31(3):424-9. PubMed ID: 20042907
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Steady-state response audiometry in a group of patients with steeply sloping sensorineural hearing loss.
    Ballay C, Tonini R, Waninger T, Yoon C, Manolidis S.
    Laryngoscope; 2005 Jul; 115(7):1243-6. PubMed ID: 15995514
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Simple reaction times in subjects with steeply sloping hearing loss: is there an alteration at the edge of the loss?
    Gabriel D, Veuillet E, Bonnet C, Vesson JF, Collet L.
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Aug; 45(8):454-62. PubMed ID: 17005488
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Ranking hearing aid input-output functions for understanding low-, conversational-, and high-level speech in multitalker babble.
    Chung K, Killion MC, Christensen LA.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):304-22. PubMed ID: 17463231
    [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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. The influence of different speech processor and hearing aid settings on speech perception outcomes in electric acoustic stimulation patients.
    Vermeire K, Anderson I, Flynn M, Van de Heyning P.
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jan; 29(1):76-86. PubMed ID: 18091097
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Comparison of a programmable 3-channel compression hearing system with single-channel AGC instruments.
    Kiessling J, Steffens T.
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993 Jan; 38():67-74. PubMed ID: 8153566
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss.
    Amos NE, Humes LE.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Aug; 50(4):819-34. PubMed ID: 17675588
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Temporal intraspeech masking of plosive bursts: effects of hearing loss and frequency shaping.
    Mackersie CL.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Jun; 50(3):554-63. PubMed ID: 17538099
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Rehabilitation plasticity: influence of hearing aid fitting on frequency discrimination performance near the hearing-loss cut-off.
    Gabriel D, Veuillet E, Vesson JF, Collet L.
    Hear Res; 2006 Mar; 213(1-2):49-57. PubMed ID: 16459036
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. The effects of high-frequency amplification on the objective and subjective performance of hearing instrument users with varying degrees of high-frequency hearing loss.
    Plyler PN, Fleck EL.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Jun; 49(3):616-27. PubMed ID: 16787899
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. High-frequency amplification and sound quality in listeners with normal through moderate hearing loss.
    Ricketts TA, Dittberner AB, Johnson EE.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Feb; 51(1):160-72. PubMed ID: 18230863
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. 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]

  • 17. Identifying dead regions in the cochlea: psychophysical tuning curves and tone detection in threshold-equalizing noise.
    Summers V, Molis MR, Müsch H, Walden BE, Surr RK, Cord MT.
    Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):133-42. PubMed ID: 12677110
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Contribution of high-frequency information to the acceptance of background noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Plyler PN, Madix SG, Thelin JW, Johnston KW.
    Am J Audiol; 2007 Dec; 16(2):149-56. PubMed ID: 18056883
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Partial deafness cochlear implantation provides benefit to a new population of individuals with hearing loss.
    Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Anderson I.
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2006 Sep; 126(9):934-40. PubMed ID: 16864490
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.
    Plant K, Holden L, Skinner M, Arcaroli J, Whitford L, Law MA, Nel E.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 17485987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.