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 *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21568424)

  • 1. A channel-selection criterion for suppressing reverberation in cochlear implants.
    Kokkinakis K; Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 May; 129(5):3221-32. PubMed ID: 21568424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reverberation suppression in cochlear implants using a blind channel-selection strategy.
    Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jun; 133(6):4188-96. PubMed ID: 23742370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of a spectral subtraction strategy to suppress reverberant energy in cochlear implant devices.
    Kokkinakis K; Runge C; Tahmina Q; Hu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jul; 138(1):115-24. PubMed ID: 26233012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The combined effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners.
    Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Jun; 51(6):437-43. PubMed ID: 22356300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Listener Factors Associated with Individual Susceptibility to Reverberation.
    Reinhart PN; Souza PE
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Jan; 29(1):73-82. PubMed ID: 29309025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Payton KL; Uchanski RM; Braida LD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Mar; 95(3):1581-92. PubMed ID: 8176061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [On the effect of reverberation on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners].
    Mühler R; Ziese M; Rostalski D; Verhey JL
    HNO; 2014 Jan; 62(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 24270967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of source-to-listener distance and masking on perception of cochlear implant processed speech in reverberant rooms.
    Whitmal NA; Poissant SF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2556-69. PubMed ID: 19894835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Parameter tuning of time-frequency masking algorithms for reverberant artifact removal within the cochlear implant stimulus.
    Shahidi LK; Collins LM; Mainsah BO
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2022 Nov; 23(6):309-316. PubMed ID: 35875863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of reverberation and masking on speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations.
    Poissant SF; Whitmal NA; Freyman RL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Mar; 119(3):1606-15. PubMed ID: 16583905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Impact of room acoustic parameters on speech and music perception among participants with cochlear implants.
    Eurich B; Klenzner T; Oehler M
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():122-132. PubMed ID: 30933704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Relations among temporal acuity, hearing loss, and the perception of speech distorted by noise and reverberation.
    Irwin RJ; McAuley SF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1987 May; 81(5):1557-65. PubMed ID: 3584693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Objective intelligibility measurement of reverberant vocoded speech for normal-hearing listeners: Towards facilitating the development of speech enhancement algorithms for cochlear implants.
    Shahidi LK; Collins LM; Mainsah BO
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2024 Mar; 155(3):2151-2168. PubMed ID: 38501923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The impact of reverberation on speech intelligibility in cochlear implant recipients.
    Kressner AA; Westermann A; Buchholz JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Aug; 144(2):1113. PubMed ID: 30180700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Using channel-specific statistical models to detect reverberation in cochlear implant stimuli.
    Desmond JM; Collins LM; Throckmorton CS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Aug; 134(2):1112-20. PubMed ID: 23927111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Speech intelligibility in reverberation with ideal binary masking: effects of early reflections and signal-to-noise ratio threshold.
    Roman N; Woodruff J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1707-17. PubMed ID: 23464040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Use of intonation contours for speech recognition in noise by cochlear implant recipients.
    Meister H; Landwehr M; Pyschny V; Grugel L; Walger M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 May; 129(5):EL204-9. PubMed ID: 21568376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Intelligibility and Clarity of Reverberant Speech: Effects of Wide Dynamic Range Compression Release Time and Working Memory.
    Reinhart PN; Souza PE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2016 Dec; 59(6):1543-1554. PubMed ID: 27997667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effects of reverberant self- and overlap-masking on speech recognition in cochlear implant listeners.
    Desmond JM; Collins LM; Throckmorton CS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jun; 135(6):EL304-10. PubMed ID: 24907838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prior exposure to a reverberant listening environment improves speech intelligibility in adult cochlear implant listeners.
    Srinivasan NK; Tobey EA; Loizou PC
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2016; 17(2):98-104. PubMed ID: 26843090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.