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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16470466)

  • 1. Speech signals used to evaluate functional status of the auditory system.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2005; 42(4 Suppl 2):79-94. PubMed ID: 16470466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Clinical validation of the Russian Matrix test - effect of hearing loss, age, and noise level.
    Warzybok A; Zhilinskaya E; Goykhburg M; Tavartkiladze G; Kollmeier B; Boboshko M
    Int J Audiol; 2020 Dec; 59(12):930-940. PubMed ID: 32815756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise.
    Turner CW; Henry BA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Oct; 112(4):1675-80. PubMed ID: 12398472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners.
    George EL; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Goverts ST; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Apr; 121(4):2362-75. PubMed ID: 17471748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field.
    Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):324-32. PubMed ID: 23263408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of companding on speech recognition in quiet and noise for listeners with ANSD.
    Narne VK; Barman A; Deepthi M
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Feb; 53(2):94-100. PubMed ID: 24237041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Speech recognition threshold in noise: effects of hearing loss, frequency response, and speech materials.
    Van Tasell DJ; Yanz JL
    J Speech Hear Res; 1987 Sep; 30(3):377-86. PubMed ID: 3669644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Temporal envelope changes of compression and speech rate: combined effects on recognition for older adults.
    Jenstad LM; Souza PE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Oct; 50(5):1123-38. PubMed ID: 17905900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Word recognition in continuous and interrupted broadband noise by young normal-hearing, older normal-hearing, and presbyacusic listeners.
    Stuart A; Phillips DP
    Ear Hear; 1996 Dec; 17(6):478-89. PubMed ID: 8979036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. The effect of intensity perturbations on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    van Schijndel NH; Houtgast T; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 May; 109(5 Pt 1):2202-10. PubMed ID: 11386571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Masking release for hearing-impaired listeners: The effect of increased audibility through reduction of amplitude variability.
    Desloge JG; Reed CM; Braida LD; Perez ZD; D'Aquila LA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4452. PubMed ID: 28679277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Speech Recognition and Parent Ratings From Auditory Development Questionnaires in Children Who Are Hard of Hearing.
    McCreery RW; Walker EA; Spratford M; Oleson J; Bentler R; Holte L; Roush P
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36 Suppl 1(0 1):60S-75S. PubMed ID: 26731160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech perception in noise with BICROS hearing aids.
    Del Dot J; Hickson LM; O'Connell B
    Scand Audiol; 1992; 21(4):261-4. PubMed ID: 1488613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of hearing impairment and aging on spatial processing.
    Glyde H; Cameron S; Dillon H; Hickson L; Seeto M
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 22941406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
    Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
    Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies III: Speech Intelligibility of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.
    Völker C; Warzybok A; Ernst SM
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.