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 *

316 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21303017)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 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. Test-retest reliability of the Toy Discrimination Test with a masker of noise or babble in children with hearing impairment.
    Lovett R; Summerfield Q; Vickers D
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Jun; 52(6):377-84. PubMed ID: 23516964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Factors influencing speech perception in noise for 5-year-old children using hearing aids or cochlear implants.
    Ching TY; Zhang VW; Flynn C; Burns L; Button L; Hou S; McGhie K; Van Buynder P
    Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(sup2):S70-S80. PubMed ID: 28687057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An algorithm to improve speech recognition in noise for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Healy EW; Yoho SE; Wang Y; Wang D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):3029-38. PubMed ID: 24116438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Auditory training of speech recognition with interrupted and continuous noise maskers by children with hearing impairment.
    Sullivan JR; Thibodeau LM; Assmann PF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):495-501. PubMed ID: 23297921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. The effects of selective consonant amplification on sentence recognition in noise by hearing-impaired listeners.
    Saripella R; Loizou PC; Thibodeau L; Alford JA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):3028-37. PubMed ID: 22087930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of combined dynamic compression and single channel noise reduction for hearing aid applications.
    Kortlang S; Chen Z; Gerkmann T; Kollmeier B; Hohmann V; Ewert SD
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S43-S54. PubMed ID: 28355947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Speech-in-Noise and Quality-of-Life Measures in School-Aged Children With Normal Hearing and With Unilateral Hearing Loss.
    Griffin AM; Poissant SF; Freyman RL
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):887-904. PubMed ID: 30418282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T; Wagener KC; Latzel M
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Improving speech-in-noise recognition for children with hearing loss: potential effects of language abilities, binaural summation, and head shadow.
    Nittrouer S; Caldwell-Tarr A; Tarr E; Lowenstein JH; Rice C; Moberly AC
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Aug; 52(8):513-25. PubMed ID: 23834373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Syllable-constituent perception by hearing-aid users: Common factors in quiet and noise.
    Miller JD; Watson CS; Leek MR; Dubno JR; Wark DJ; Souza PE; Gordon-Salant S; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2933. PubMed ID: 28464618
    [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. 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]  

  • 17. Dynamic relation between working memory capacity and speech recognition in noise during the first 6 months of hearing aid use.
    Ng EH; Classon E; Larsby B; Arlinger S; Lunner T; Rudner M; Rönnberg J
    Trends Hear; 2014 Nov; 18():. PubMed ID: 25421088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of nearby maskers on speech intelligibility in reverberant, multi-talker environments.
    Westermann A; Buchholz JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):2214. PubMed ID: 28372143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Use of high-rate envelope speech cues and their perceptually relevant dynamic range for the hearing impaired.
    Stone MA; Anton K; Moore BC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):1141-51. PubMed ID: 22894233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Large-scale training to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in novel noises.
    Chen J; Wang Y; Yoho SE; Wang D; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2604. PubMed ID: 27250154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.