BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

529 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18490862)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Modeling speech intelligibility in quiet and noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Rhebergen KS; Lyzenga J; Dreschler WA; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Mar; 127(3):1570-83. PubMed ID: 20329857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Extended speech intelligibility index for the prediction of the speech reception threshold in fluctuating noise.
    Rhebergen KS; Versfeld NJ; Dreschler WA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Dec; 120(6):3988-97. PubMed ID: 17225425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Sentence intelligibility in noise for listeners with normal hearing and hearing impairment: influence of measurement procedure and masking parameters.
    Wagener KC; Brand T
    Int J Audiol; 2005 Mar; 44(3):144-56. PubMed ID: 15916115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: steady-state noise.
    Smits C; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):2987-98. PubMed ID: 22087927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 2: improving test sensitivity for noise-induced hearing loss.
    Leensen MC; de Laat JA; Snik AF; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Nov; 50(11):835-48. PubMed ID: 21970351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evidence-based occupational hearing screening II: validation of a screening methodology using measures of functional hearing ability.
    Soli SD; Amano-Kusumoto A; Clavier O; Wilbur J; Casto K; Freed D; Laroche C; Vaillancourt V; Giguère C; Dreschler WA; Rhebergen KS
    Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(5):323-334. PubMed ID: 29668374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 27.