BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21786910)

  • 21. Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Kreft HA
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):658-77. PubMed ID: 17086077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effects of lowpass and highpass filtering on the intelligibility of speech based on temporal fine structure or envelope cues.
    Ardoint M; Lorenzi C
    Hear Res; 2010 Feb; 260(1-2):89-95. PubMed ID: 19963053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Electrophysiological and behavioral measures of some speech contrasts in varied attention and noise.
    Morris DJ; Tøndering J; Lindgren M
    Hear Res; 2019 Mar; 373():1-9. PubMed ID: 30553033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. You are only as old as you sound: auditory aftereffects in vocal age perception.
    Zäske R; Schweinberger SR
    Hear Res; 2011 Dec; 282(1-2):283-8. PubMed ID: 21771649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception.
    Nie K; Barco A; Zeng FG
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):208-17. PubMed ID: 16518146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Emotionally conditioning the target-speech voice enhances recognition of the target speech under "cocktail-party" listening conditions.
    Lu L; Bao X; Chen J; Qu T; Wu X; Li L
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2018 May; 80(4):871-883. PubMed ID: 29473143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Discrimination of speaker size from syllable phrases.
    Ives DT; Smith DR; Patterson RD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2005 Dec; 118(6):3816-22. PubMed ID: 16419826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparison of auditory temporal resolution between monolingual Persian and bilingual Turkish-Persian individuals.
    Omidvar S; Jafari Z; Tahaei AA; Salehi M
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Apr; 52(4):236-41. PubMed ID: 23398178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effects of noise and audiovisual cues on speech processing in adults with and without ADHD.
    Michalek AM; Watson SM; Ash I; Ringleb S; Raymer A
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Mar; 53(3):145-52. PubMed ID: 24456181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Speech perception of noise with binary gains.
    Wang D; Kjems U; Pedersen MS; Boldt JB; Lunner T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Oct; 124(4):2303-7. PubMed ID: 19062868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The effect of priming on release from informational masking is equivalent for younger and older adults.
    Ezzatian P; Li L; Pichora-Fuller K; Schneider B
    Ear Hear; 2011 Feb; 32(1):84-96. PubMed ID: 21178568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The effect of voice cuing on releasing speech from informational masking disappears in older adults.
    Huang Y; Xu L; Wu X; Li L
    Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):579-83. PubMed ID: 20531200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The role of speaker gender identification in relative fundamental frequency height estimation from multispeaker, brief speech segments.
    Lee CY; Dutton L; Ram G
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jul; 128(1):384-8. PubMed ID: 20649232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. An adaptive clinical test of temporal resolution: age effects.
    Lister JJ; Roberts RA; Lister FL
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jun; 50(6):367-74. PubMed ID: 21299377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Perceptual assimilation of Dutch vowels by Peruvian Spanish listeners.
    Escudero P; Williams D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jan; 129(1):EL1-7. PubMed ID: 21302975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Perception of the [m]-[n] distinction in consonant-vowel (CV) and vowel-consonant (VC) syllables produced by child and adult talkers.
    Ohde RN; Haley KL; Barnes CW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Mar; 119(3):1697-711. PubMed ID: 16583913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Location and acoustic scale cues in concurrent speech recognition.
    Ives DT; Vestergaard MD; Kistler DJ; Patterson RD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jun; 127(6):3729-37. PubMed ID: 20550271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations: Effects of carrier type, interfering noise, and subject experience.
    Whitmal NA; Poissant SF; Freyman RL; Helfer KS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Oct; 122(4):2376-88. PubMed ID: 17902872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Evaluation of speech transmission in open public spaces affected by combined noises.
    Lee PJ; Jeon JY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):219-27. PubMed ID: 21786892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Development of the Listening Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (LSEQ).
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller KM; Watts KL; La More C
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jun; 50(6):417-25. PubMed ID: 21470067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.