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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

96 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1512317)

  • 41. [The noise-suppression capacity of the auditory analyzer for interfering speech in one's native and in an unknown language].
    Tatevosian GI
    Vestn Otorinolaringol; 1994; (2):14-7. PubMed ID: 7855991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Speech Masking in Normal and Impaired Hearing: Interactions Between Frequency Selectivity and Inherent Temporal Fluctuations in Noise.
    Oxenham AJ; Kreft HA
    Adv Exp Med Biol; 2016; 894():125-132. PubMed ID: 27080653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Laboratory evaluation of an optimised internet-based speech-in-noise test for occupational high-frequency hearing loss screening: Occupational Earcheck.
    Sheikh Rashid M; Leensen MCJ; de Laat JAPM; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Nov; 56(11):844-853. PubMed ID: 28587489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Transient auditory storage of acoustic details is associated with release of speech from informational masking in reverberant conditions.
    Huang Y; Huang Q; Chen X; Wu X; Li L
    J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform; 2009 Oct; 35(5):1618-28. PubMed ID: 19803660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. [Speech audiometric assessment of informational masking. German version].
    Rählmann S; Meister H
    HNO; 2017 Mar; 65(3):228-236. PubMed ID: 28054098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. New measures of masked text recognition in relation to speech-in-noise perception and their associations with age and cognitive abilities.
    Besser J; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Rönnberg J; Festen JM
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2012 Feb; 55(1):194-209. PubMed ID: 22199191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The effects of masking on the activation of auditory-associated cortex during speech listening in white noise.
    Hwang JH; Wu CW; Chen JH; Liu TC
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2006 Sep; 126(9):916-20. PubMed ID: 16864487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. [The mapping of the masking effect of noise in relation to the adaptive potentials of the auditory analyzer for speech communication].
    Tsaneva L
    Probl Khig; 1994; 19():65-71. PubMed ID: 7845994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Binaural speech unmasking and localization in noise with bilateral cochlear implants using envelope and fine-timing based strategies.
    van Hoesel R; Böhm M; Pesch J; Vandali A; Battmer RD; Lenarz T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Apr; 123(4):2249-63. PubMed ID: 18397030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Irrelevant speech effect under stationary and adaptive masking conditions.
    Park M; Kohlrausch A; van Leest A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):1970-81. PubMed ID: 23967930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Effects of envelope discontinuities on perceptual restoration of amplitude-compressed speech.
    Başkent D; Eiler C; Edwards B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Jun; 125(6):3995-4005. PubMed ID: 19507981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: the German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype.
    Zokoll MA; Wagener KC; Brand T; Buschermöhle M; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Sep; 51(9):697-707. PubMed ID: 22762202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Acoustic stapedius reflex function in man revisited.
    Aiken SJ; Andrus JN; Bance M; Phillips DP
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(4):e38-51. PubMed ID: 23403808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Preservation of amplitude modulation coding in the presence of background noise by chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers.
    Frisina RD; Karcich KJ; Tracy TC; Sullivan DM; Walton JP; Colombo J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Jan; 99(1):475-90. PubMed ID: 8568035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. [The effect of different types of music on the perception of speech information].
    Tsaneva L; Danev S
    Probl Khig; 1995; 20():116-21. PubMed ID: 8524734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Audiovisual training is better than auditory-only training for auditory-only speech-in-noise identification.
    Lidestam B; Moradi S; Pettersson R; Ricklefs T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):EL142-7. PubMed ID: 25096138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. The effects of spatial separation in distance on the informational and energetic masking of a nearby speech signal.
    Brungart DS; Simpson BD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Aug; 112(2):664-76. PubMed ID: 12186046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Sources of Variability in Consonant Perception and Implications for Speech Perception Modeling.
    Zaar J; Dau T
    Adv Exp Med Biol; 2016; 894():437-446. PubMed ID: 27080685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Intelligibility and listener preference of telephone speech in the presence of babble noise.
    Hall JL; Flanagan JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jan; 127(1):280-5. PubMed ID: 20058974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. The combined effects of reverberation and nonstationary noise on sentence intelligibility.
    George EL; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Aug; 124(2):1269-77. PubMed ID: 18681613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.