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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22978882)

  • 1. A frequency-selective feedback model of auditory efferent suppression and its implications for the recognition of speech in noise.
    Clark NR; Brown GJ; Jürgens T; Meddis R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1535-41. PubMed ID: 22978882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A computer model of auditory efferent suppression: implications for the recognition of speech in noise.
    Brown GJ; Ferry RT; Meddis R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Feb; 127(2):943-54. PubMed ID: 20136217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Predicting speech intelligibility based on the signal-to-noise envelope power ratio after modulation-frequency selective processing.
    Jørgensen S; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1475-87. PubMed ID: 21895088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A computer model of medial efferent suppression in the mammalian auditory system.
    Ferry RT; Meddis R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Dec; 122(6):3519-26. PubMed ID: 18247760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm.
    Fink N; Furst M; Muchnik C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1718-31. PubMed ID: 22978899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Can basic auditory and cognitive measures predict hearing-impaired listeners' localization and spatial speech recognition abilities?
    Neher T; Laugesen S; Jensen NS; Kragelund L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1542-58. PubMed ID: 21895093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Revision and validation of a binaural model for speech intelligibility in noise.
    Jelfs S; Culling JF; Lavandier M
    Hear Res; 2011 May; 275(1-2):96-104. PubMed ID: 21156201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The influence of age, hearing, and working memory on the speech comprehension benefit derived from an automatic speech recognition system.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
    Ear Hear; 2009 Apr; 30(2):262-72. PubMed ID: 19194286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A simulation framework for auditory discrimination experiments: Revealing the importance of across-frequency processing in speech perception.
    Schädler MR; Warzybok A; Ewert SD; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2708. PubMed ID: 27250164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Does it take older adults longer than younger adults to perceptually segregate a speech target from a background masker?
    Ben-David BM; Tse VY; Schneider BA
    Hear Res; 2012 Aug; 290(1-2):55-63. PubMed ID: 22609772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effects of binaural spectral resolution mismatch on Mandarin speech perception in simulated electric hearing.
    Chen F; Wong LL; Tahmina Q; Azimi B; Hu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):EL142-8. PubMed ID: 22894313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Relationship between speech recognition in noise and sparseness.
    Li G; Lutman ME; Wang S; Bleeck S
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Feb; 51(2):75-82. PubMed ID: 22107445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Microscopic prediction of speech recognition for listeners with normal hearing in noise using an auditory model.
    Jürgens T; Brand T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2635-48. PubMed ID: 19894841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The robustness of speech representations obtained from simulated auditory nerve fibers under different noise conditions.
    Jürgens T; Brand T; Clark NR; Meddis R; Brown GJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):EL282-8. PubMed ID: 23968061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Relationship between masking release in fluctuating maskers and speech reception thresholds in stationary noise.
    Christiansen C; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1655-66. PubMed ID: 22978894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effects of age and background noise on processing a mistuned harmonic in an otherwise periodic complex sound.
    Alain C; McDonald K; Van Roon P
    Hear Res; 2012 Jan; 283(1-2):126-35. PubMed ID: 22101023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Use of a sigmoidal-shaped function for noise attenuation in cochlear implants.
    Hu Y; Loizou PC; Li N; Kasturi K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Oct; 122(4):EL128-34. PubMed ID: 17902741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Development and evaluation of the Mandarin speech signal content on the acceptable noise level test in listeners with normal hearing in mainland China.
    Chen J; Zhang H; Plyler PN; Cao W; Chen J
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jun; 50(6):354-60. PubMed ID: 21599613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Revision, extension, and evaluation of a binaural speech intelligibility model.
    Beutelmann R; Brand T; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Apr; 127(4):2479-97. PubMed ID: 20370031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.