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 *

119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18332632)

  • 1. Cultural and language differences in voice quality perception: a preliminary investigation using synthesized signals.
    Yiu EM; Murdoch B; Hird K; Lau P; Ho EM
    Folia Phoniatr Logop; 2008; 60(3):107-19. PubMed ID: 18332632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reliability and confidence in using a paired comparison paradigm in perceptual voice quality evaluation.
    Yiu EM; Chan KM; Mok RS
    Clin Linguist Phon; 2007 Feb; 21(2):129-45. PubMed ID: 17364621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Perception of synthesized voice quality in connected speech by Cantonese speakers.
    Yiu EM; Murdoch B; Hird K; Lau P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Sep; 112(3 Pt 1):1091-101. PubMed ID: 12243157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Perceptual analysis in different voice samples: agreement and reliability.
    Muñoz J; Mendoza E; Fresneda MD; Carballo G; Ramirez I
    Percept Mot Skills; 2002 Jun; 94(3 Pt 2):1187-95. PubMed ID: 12186240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of anchors and training on the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation.
    Chan KM; Yiu EM
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Feb; 45(1):111-26. PubMed ID: 14748643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of voice quality ratings made by Japanese and American listeners using the GRBAS scale.
    Yamaguchi H; Shrivastav R; Andrews ML; Niimi S
    Folia Phoniatr Logop; 2003; 55(3):147-57. PubMed ID: 12771466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of experience on classification of voice quality.
    Sofranko JL; Prosek RA
    J Voice; 2012 May; 26(3):299-303. PubMed ID: 22082862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reliability in perceptual analysis of voice quality.
    Bele IV
    J Voice; 2005 Dec; 19(4):555-73. PubMed ID: 16301102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of listeners' linguistic background on perceptual judgements of hypernasality.
    Lee A; Brown S; Gibbon FE
    Int J Lang Commun Disord; 2008; 43(5):487-98. PubMed ID: 22612628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Can we perceptually rate alaryngeal voice? Developing the Sunderland Tracheoesophageal Voice Perceptual Scale.
    Hurren A; Hildreth AJ; Carding PN
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2009 Dec; 34(6):533-8. PubMed ID: 20070762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Perception of individuals with voice disorders by monolingual English, bilingual Cantonese-English, and bilingual Russian-English women.
    Altenberg EP; Ferrand CT
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Aug; 49(4):879-87. PubMed ID: 16908882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Multidimensional scaling of breathy voice quality: individual differences in perception.
    Shrivastav R
    J Voice; 2006 Jun; 20(2):211-22. PubMed ID: 16165342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of consensus training on the reliability of auditory perceptual ratings of voice quality.
    Iwarsson J; Reinholt Petersen N
    J Voice; 2012 May; 26(3):304-12. PubMed ID: 21840170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of perceptual training on inexperienced listeners' judgments of dysphonic voice.
    Eadie TL; Baylor CR
    J Voice; 2006 Dec; 20(4):527-44. PubMed ID: 16324823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The role of listener experience on Consensus Auditory-perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) ratings of postthyroidectomy voice.
    Helou LB; Solomon NP; Henry LR; Coppit GL; Howard RS; Stojadinovic A
    Am J Speech Lang Pathol; 2010 Aug; 19(3):248-58. PubMed ID: 20484704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Application of psychometric theory to the measurement of voice quality using rating scales.
    Shrivastav R; Sapienza CM; Nandur V
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Apr; 48(2):323-35. PubMed ID: 15989395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reliability of clinician-based (GRBAS and CAPE-V) and patient-based (V-RQOL and IPVI) documentation of voice disorders.
    Karnell MP; Melton SD; Childes JM; Coleman TC; Dailey SA; Hoffman HT
    J Voice; 2007 Sep; 21(5):576-90. PubMed ID: 16822648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effects of perceptual training based upon synthesized voice signals.
    Martin DP; Wolfe VI
    Percept Mot Skills; 1996 Dec; 83(3 Pt 2):1291-8. PubMed ID: 9017742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sources of listener disagreement in voice quality assessment.
    Kreiman J; Gerratt BR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Oct; 108(4):1867-76. PubMed ID: 11051513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The reliability and validity of patient self-rating of their own voice quality.
    Lee M; Drinnan M; Carding P
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2005 Aug; 30(4):357-61. PubMed ID: 16209679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.