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 *

227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19010794)

  • 1. Evaluating the benefit of hearing aids in solving the cocktail party problem.
    Marrone N; Mason CR; Kidd G
    Trends Amplif; 2008 Dec; 12(4):300-15. PubMed ID: 19010794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Benefits of Acoustic Beamforming for Solving the Cocktail Party Problem.
    Kidd G; Mason CR; Best V; Swaminathan J
    Trends Hear; 2015 Jun; 19():. PubMed ID: 26126896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of single-microphone noise reduction schemes: can hearing impaired listeners tell the difference?
    Huber R; Bisitz T; Gerkmann T; Kiessling J; Meister H; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S55-S61. PubMed ID: 28112001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of directional sound processing and listener's motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech: Do normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners differ?
    Mirkovic B; Debener S; Schmidt J; Jaeger M; Neher T
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():260-270. PubMed ID: 31003037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Spatial release from masking in normal-hearing children and children who use hearing aids.
    Ching TY; van Wanrooy E; Dillon H; Carter L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jan; 129(1):368-75. PubMed ID: 21303017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Focusing on Positive Listening Experiences Improves Speech Intelligibility in Experienced Hearing Aid Users.
    Lelic D; Nielsen LLA; Pedersen AK; Neher T
    Trends Hear; 2024; 28():23312165241246616. PubMed ID: 38656770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. The effect of tone-vocoding on spatial release from masking for old, hearing-impaired listeners.
    King A; Hopkins K; Plack CJ; Pontoppidan NH; Bramsløw L; Hietkamp RK; Vatti M; Hafez A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2591. PubMed ID: 28464637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of interferer facing orientation on speech perception by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Strelcyk O; Pentony S; Kalluri S; Edwards B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1419-32. PubMed ID: 24606279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An algorithm to increase intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in the presence of a competing talker.
    Healy EW; Delfarah M; Vasko JL; Carter BL; Wang D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4230. PubMed ID: 28618817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of early and late reflections on intelligibility of reverberated speech by cochlear implant listeners.
    Hu Y; Kokkinakis K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL22-8. PubMed ID: 24437852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility in normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Xia J; Xu B; Pentony S; Xu J; Swaminathan J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Mar; 143(3):1523. PubMed ID: 29604671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Acoustic and perceptual effects of magnifying interaural difference cues in a simulated "binaural" hearing aid.
    de Taillez T; Grimm G; Kollmeier B; Neher T
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S81-S91. PubMed ID: 28395561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Blind binary masking for reverberation suppression in cochlear implants.
    Hazrati O; Lee J; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1607-14. PubMed ID: 23464030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Examination of a hybrid beamformer that preserves auditory spatial cues.
    Best V; Roverud E; Mason CR; Kidd G
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Oct; 142(4):EL369. PubMed ID: 29092558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An evaluation of the performance of two binaural beamformers in complex and dynamic multitalker environments.
    Best V; Mejia J; Freeston K; van Hoesel RJ; Dillon H
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54(10):727-35. PubMed ID: 26140298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Auditory inspired machine learning techniques can improve speech intelligibility and quality for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Monaghan JJ; Goehring T; Yang X; Bolner F; Wang S; Wright MC; Bleeck S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):1985. PubMed ID: 28372043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The role of early and late reflections on spatial release from masking: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Srinivasan NK; Stansell M; Gallun FJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):EL185. PubMed ID: 28372125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Impact of SNR, masker type and noise reduction processing on sentence recognition performance and listening effort as indicated by the pupil dilation response.
    Ohlenforst B; Wendt D; Kramer SE; Naylor G; Zekveld AA; Lunner T
    Hear Res; 2018 Aug; 365():90-99. PubMed ID: 29779607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Integrating cognitive and peripheral factors in predicting hearing-aid processing effectiveness.
    Kates JM; Arehart KH; Souza PE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Dec; 134(6):4458. PubMed ID: 25669257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.