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
109 related items for PubMed ID: 20220201
1. Benefits of adaptive FM systems on speech recognition in noise for listeners who use hearing aids. Thibodeau L. Am J Audiol; 2010 Jun; 19(1):36-45. PubMed ID: 20220201 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of speech recognition with adaptive digital and FM remote microphone hearing assistance technology by listeners who use hearing aids. Thibodeau L. Am J Audiol; 2014 Jun; 23(2):201-10. PubMed ID: 24699929 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Impact of visual cues on directional benefit and preference: Part II--field tests. Wu YH, Bentler RA. Ear Hear; 2010 Feb; 31(1):35-46. PubMed ID: 19773657 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Impact of visual cues on directional benefit and preference: Part I--laboratory tests. Wu YH, Bentler RA. Ear Hear; 2010 Feb; 31(1):22-34. PubMed ID: 19864954 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Hearing aid accessories for adults: the remote FM microphone. Boothroyd A. Ear Hear; 2004 Feb; 25(1):22-33. PubMed ID: 14770015 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of noise source configuration on directional benefit using symmetric and asymmetric directional hearing aid fittings. Hornsby BW, Ricketts TA. Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):177-86. PubMed ID: 17496669 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Bilateral vibrant soundbridge implantation: audiologic and subjective benefits in quiet and noisy environments. Garin P, Schmerber S, Magnan J, Truy E, Uziel A, Triglia JM, Bebear JP, Labassi S, Lavieille JP. Acta Otolaryngol; 2010 Dec; 130(12):1370-8. PubMed ID: 20819026 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Effect of a Bluetooth-implemented hearing aid on speech recognition performance: subjective and objective measurement. Kim MB, Chung WH, Choi J, Hong SH, Cho YS, Park G, Lee S. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2014 Jun; 123(6):395-401. PubMed ID: 24687593 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and its relationship to aided reported handicap and hearing aid satisfaction. Saunders GH, Forsline A. Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):229-42. PubMed ID: 16672792 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Electroacoustic evaluation of frequency-modulated receivers interfaced with personal hearing aids. Schafer EC, Thibodeau LM, Whalen HS, Overson GJ. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch; 2007 Oct; 38(4):315-26. PubMed ID: 17890512 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Children's speech recognition scores: the Speech Intelligibility Index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level. Scollie SD. Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):543-56. PubMed ID: 18469717 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Effects of frequency modulation (FM) transmitter microphone directivity on speech perception in noise. Lewis MS, Crandell CC, Kreisman NV. Am J Audiol; 2004 Jun; 13(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 15248800 [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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Combined effects of noise and reverberation on speech recognition performance of normal-hearing children and adults. Neuman AC, Wroblewski M, Hajicek J, Rubinstein A. Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):336-44. PubMed ID: 20215967 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Development and assessment of two fixed-array microphones for use with hearing aids. Bilsen FA, Soede W, Berkhout AJ. J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993 Jun; 30(1):73-81. PubMed ID: 8263830 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners. Burk MH, Humes LE, Amos NE, Strauser LE. Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]