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 *

314 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18389414)

  • 1. Learning effect observed for the speech reception threshold in interrupted noise with normal hearing listeners.
    Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2008 Apr; 47(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 18389414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Prediction of the intelligibility for speech in real-life background noises for subjects with normal hearing.
    Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
    Ear Hear; 2008 Apr; 29(2):169-75. PubMed ID: 18490862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Modelling the speech reception threshold in non-stationary noise in hearing-impaired listeners as a function of level.
    Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; de Laat JA; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Nov; 49(11):856-65. PubMed ID: 20936997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
    Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 20588118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Relationship between masking release in fluctuating maskers and speech reception thresholds in stationary noise.
    Christiansen C; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1655-66. PubMed ID: 22978894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Speech-reception threshold in noise for hearing-impaired listeners in conditions with a varying amplitude-frequency response.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Festen JM; Plomp R
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():202-6. PubMed ID: 2356728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Some aspects of methodology in speech audiometry.
    Hagerman B
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1984; 21():1-25. PubMed ID: 6589731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The efficacy of a multichannel hearing aid in which the gain is controlled by the minima in the temporal signal envelope.
    Festen JM; van Dijkhuizen JN; Plomp R
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993; 38():101-10. PubMed ID: 8153556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Establishment of age-specific normative data for the canadian French version of the hearing in noise test for children.
    Vaillancourt V; Laroche C; Giguère C; Soli SD
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):453-66. PubMed ID: 18349705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Recognition of digits in different types of noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Smits C; Houtgast T
    Int J Audiol; 2007 Mar; 46(3):134-44. PubMed ID: 17365067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. The benefit obtained from visually displayed text from an automatic speech recognizer during listening to speech presented in noise.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):838-52. PubMed ID: 18633325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The dynamic range of speech, compression, and its effect on the speech reception threshold in stationary and interrupted noise.
    Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Dec; 126(6):3236-45. PubMed ID: 20000937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests.
    Hochmuth S; Kollmeier B; Brand T; Jürgens T
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():62-70. PubMed ID: 26097982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The digits-in-noise test: assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise.
    Smits C; Theo Goverts S; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1693-706. PubMed ID: 23464039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of hearing thresholds obtained using pure-tone behavioral audiometry, the Cantonese Hearing in Noise Test (CHINT) and cortical evoked response audiometry.
    Wong LL; Cheung C; Wong EC
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2008 Jun; 128(6):654-60. PubMed ID: 18568500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The development of the text reception threshold test: a visual analogue of the speech reception threshold test.
    Zekveld AA; George EL; Kramer SE; Goverts ST; Houtgast T
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Jun; 50(3):576-84. PubMed ID: 17538101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Characterizing the Speech Reception Threshold in hearing-impaired listeners in relation to masker type and masker level.
    Rhebergen KS; Pool RE; Dreschler WA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1491-505. PubMed ID: 24606285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise.
    Smits C; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):3004-15. PubMed ID: 23654404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.