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 *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16266181)

  • 21. Acoustic Cue Weighting by Adults with Cochlear Implants: A Mismatch Negativity Study.
    Moberly AC; Bhat J; Shahin AJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(4):465-72. PubMed ID: 26655914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Masking release and modulation interference in cochlear implant and simulation listeners.
    Jin SH; Nie Y; Nelson P
    Am J Audiol; 2013 Jun; 22(1):135-46. PubMed ID: 23800809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Speech recognition for unilateral and bilateral cochlear implant modes in the presence of uncorrelated noise sources.
    Ricketts TA; Grantham DW; Ashmead DH; Haynes DS; Labadie RF
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):763-73. PubMed ID: 17086085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Weighting of cues for fricative place of articulation perception by children wearing cochlear implants.
    Hedrick M; Bahng J; von Hapsburg D; Younger MS
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):540-7. PubMed ID: 21604957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: effects of hearing loss and presentation level.
    Summers V; Molis MR
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Apr; 47(2):245-56. PubMed ID: 15157127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception.
    Nie K; Barco A; Zeng FG
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):208-17. PubMed ID: 16518146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effects of age and hearing mechanism on spectral resolution in normal hearing and cochlear-implanted listeners.
    Horn DL; Dudley DJ; Dedhia K; Nie K; Drennan WR; Won JH; Rubinstein JT; Werner LA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):613. PubMed ID: 28147578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Speech perception with F0mod, a cochlear implant pitch coding strategy.
    Francart T; Osses A; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jun; 54(6):424-32. PubMed ID: 25697275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Lexical bias in word recognition by cochlear implant listeners.
    Gianakas SP; Winn MB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2019 Nov; 146(5):3373. PubMed ID: 31795696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adult Listeners: Speech-On-Speech Masking and Multitalker Localization.
    Rana B; Buchholz JM; Morgan C; Sharma M; Weller T; Konganda SA; Shirai K; Kawano A
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517722106. PubMed ID: 28752811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Phoneme recognition in vocoded maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):859-66. PubMed ID: 25096119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Speech masking release in listeners with flat hearing loss: effects of masker fluctuation rate on identification scores and phonetic feature reception.
    Lorenzi C; Husson M; Ardoint M; Debruille X
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Sep; 45(9):487-95. PubMed ID: 17005491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Pre- and Postoperative Binaural Unmasking for Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners.
    Sheffield BM; Schuchman G; Bernstein JGW
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):554-567. PubMed ID: 28301390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The Effect of Interaural Mismatches on Contralateral Unmasking With Single-Sided Vocoders.
    Wess JM; Brungart DS; Bernstein JGW
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(3):374-386. PubMed ID: 28002083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Prediction of speech intelligibility in spatial noise and reverberation for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Beutelmann R; Brand T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Jul; 120(1):331-42. PubMed ID: 16875230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Relative importance of temporal information in various frequency regions for consonant identification in quiet and in noise.
    Apoux F; Bacon SP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Sep; 116(3):1671-80. PubMed ID: 15478433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The role of continuous low-frequency harmonicity cues for interrupted speech perception in bimodal hearing.
    Oh SH; Donaldson GS; Kong YY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Apr; 139(4):1747. PubMed ID: 27106322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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